Matt (4:09)

It was a pardon for not setting up things to catch blatant criminal activity on the exchange.

Emma Vigeland (4:15)

Why would Trump be interested in covering up blatant criminal activity? The Israeli Knesset advances a bill to formally annex the west bank while JD Dances in town. And he's offended. Israel strikes southern Lebanon, filing yet another ceasefire. The Israeli Supreme Court once again refuses to let international reporters into Gaza. They are hiding the true death toll. Blinking, blinking, flashing alarm bells. They don't want there to be recovery of the evidence. Here. Trump officially greenlights a plan to open a pristine Alaska wildlife refuge to oil and gas drilling. He also says he will not ask Congress for authorization on Venezuelan Whalen, on striking Venezuelan boats, despite the Constitution requiring it for acts of war shutdown. Watch. It is day 24. Republicans are anxious about expiring ACA subsidies as Trump still bars them from negotiating with Democrats. And lastly, the economy keeps flashing warning signs, target cuts 1800 jobs as tariffs wreak havoc. And I guess, actually lastly, early voting in New York City begins tomorrow. This is very important. If you're a listener to this show and you're in New York City and not voting, I don't know what we've done wrong. But early voting starts tomorrow on the 25th. All this and more on today's Majority Report. And you know, I don't know the official early voting dates for other states, but we have many races around the country, even though it's an off year, that they're going to be really important. Just across the river, of course, we have the governor's race in New Jersey and others. People might really enjoy going back and listening to my interview with Daniel Nakanian from, I guess, a week and a half or so ago, where he laid out a lot of the races that are important. I mean, Omar Fateh, another race that we need to be supporting. I was really happy to see that our girl Ilhan Omar has Been going hard for him in the final weeks. It was kind of like the AOC strategy. Right. Getting more attention when it's the right time to.

Matt (6:45)

And people really need to turn out for Socialist Robin WANSLEY In Ward 2 election in Minneapolis, who is facing a challenge there from the establishment. We need Robin to win, too. So if you're in Minneapolis, particularly in Ward 2, or know people in Ward 2, get him to lock in.

Emma Vigeland (7:04)

Absolutely. Let's start here because it's been over two weeks or at around two weeks since, you know, the ceasefire was announced. Although Israel continues to violate it and bomb and kill dozens of Palestinians a day in Gaza. They.

Matt (7:26)

Yeah, it's an interesting ceasefire.

Emma Vigeland (7:28)

Yeah. I mean, it's the same thing in Mosaic.

Matt (7:30)

Drop bombs on people.

Emma Vigeland (7:31)

The ceasefire holds because there is completely disorder. There's disproportionate force on the Israeli side, and everybody knows it. So they have to. To make sure that they're not being bombed into oblivion. Seemingly allow repeated violations of the ceasefire to keep the genocidal rabid country happy to maintain the bloodlust. They are breaking the Lebanon cease fire. They're breaking the ceasefire in Gaza, and then they'll blame Hamas. So it's just. This is how Israel operates. And they continue to block aid from getting into Gaza. The trucks are not getting in at the level that they are supposed to be. When have we heard that before? Even though there is supposedly a ceasefire, the. The international press, as I mentioned, has not been allowed into Israel into Gaza. There was a statement that was put out, I believe, by the Foreign Press association, because the Israeli Supreme Court, shockingly, I know you'll be shocked by this. Said it's not time for international reporters to go into Gaza and document the genocide, perhaps uncover the true death toll and the reality of the destruction. UNRWA is still being blocked from getting in. It's the only organization that has the infrastructure that could adequately address the humanitarian crisis there. And they are being blocked. So the situation remains immensely dire in the Gaza Strip. But then we turn to the West Bank. Oh, I should also say Israel controls over 50% of Gaza at this point. They have drawn this invisible line and have been shooting at Palestinians on sight as they try to cross the invisible line into the essentially occupied territory of over 50% of the Gaza Strip. When they're trying to go back to their homes. Israel hasn't said, has given vague notions of where this kill line is, but not being very clear. And they're just gunning Palestinians down as they try to go to their homes. Which for all they know, is just rubble at this point. And then there's the west bank as a reminder. Israel has illegally occupied the west bank and east Jerusalem since 1967. They illegally stole the territory. And since that time, more than 700,000 Israelis have lived, have stolen homes and land, and have put up settlements in the west bank and in occupied East Jerusalem. So, and formal annexation is all, but that it is only really just a formality. Right.

Matt (10:24)

You're literally taking somebody's house that they used to live in and saying, this is mine now because of who I am and who you are.

Emma Vigeland (10:30)

And that's exactly how they did it in 1948. It's the same. Same thing. So this is a formality. But then the question is why the formality? The formality is that two days ago, the Knesset voted 25 to 24 to advance a bill that would basically say that Israel has sovereignty over what they call Judea and Samaria and what Bill Clinton and Mike Huckabee will call Judea and Samaria, which is the Jewish fundamentalist way to say that this is Jewish land only, but it means the West Bank. And they advanced the bill saying we have sovereignty over the entire West Bank. Netanyahu and Likud did the most unconvincing protestation of it, but knowing that the far right ministers were spearheading this effort and that it was going to pass, because it doesn't even matter if they formalize it. Netanyahu's government's already doing it. Then the question is, why formalize it? And I saw that Mary of Zostin, who writes for Crisis Group, is a really good reporter on this, was positing that it was a way to try to humiliate Netanyahu or embarrass him into more bloodshed, because J.D. vance was in town at the time. And Trump has said publicly that west bank annexation is a red line because they're obsessed with the Abraham Accords. They want to codify the Abraham Accords. And the other states in the region say that this is our red line on things like that in terms of formalizing our relationship with Israel. So here is J.D. vance on the tarmac, basically saying, why did. Why would the genocidal government of Israel do this while I was in town? Yeah, go ahead.

JD Vance (12:34)

We'll do.

Emma Vigeland (12:35)

Yeah, the west bank vote yesterday that took place while you were in the country.

JD Vance (12:38)

Oh, yeah, that was weird. That was weird. I was sort of confused by that. Now I actually asked somebody about it, and they told me that it was a Symbolic vote. Some symbolic vote to recognize or a symbolic vote to annex the West Bank. I mean, what I would say to that is when I asked about it, somebody told me that it was a political stunt, that it had no practical significance, it was purely symbolic. I mean, look, if it was a political stunt, it was a very stupid political stunt, and I personally take some insult to it. The west bank is not going to be annexed by Israel. The policy of the Trump administration is that the west bank will not be annexed by Israel. That will continue to be our policy. And if people want to take symbolic votes, they can do that. But we certainly weren't happy about it. Thank you.

Emma Vigeland (13:25)

Yeah, so that's when they. He says we're not happy about it. It's because of the Abraham Accords. Let's be clear. It's not because this administration has an iota of humanity towards the Palestinian people. They are. Trump's personal wealth is tied up in money with other Arab states that do not want the west bank annexation for selfish reasons, too. One, because the. Israel's obviously deeply unpopular in these countries. If there's any semblance of democracy or like any, you know, discontent within their population about this, they might have to answer to it, even though many of these governments, of course, are incredibly authoritarian and undemocratic. But two, because if it pisses off these governments, Trump can't make as much money as he wants when they're doing crypto deals in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates and of course, all of these arms deals and other ventures with the Saudis. So that's what they're really upset about. But we're happy that supposedly a line is being drawn there. But it's just so. I think it's weird. What do you mean, weird? This has been the reality of, of course, the past two years, the past over 100 years. It's not weird. It's actually the most obvious thing possible, the most obvious outcome that could have been anticipated, that Israel is going to try to formally annex the West Bank. One state is what they envision. Netanyahu held up a map at the United nations showing that the west bank was a part of Greater Israel. I don't know who this is fooling, but he talks just God like he's like the most online young right wing boy. And I think that's who they're targeting, by the way, with all the. They feel like they can sustain their political constituency with young men. So. But it doesn't translate in, like, his whiningness in, in when you Hear him talk.

Matt (15:25)

Well, because it's weakness.

Emma Vigeland (15:26)

Like on Twitter, they have to mask.

Matt (15:27)

Weakness on this, which is. It is the only thing that's different is the symbolism of is this formally recognized or is it not? Because when you're waving through giant new settlements and having people continually kicked out of homes and the settlers, like we see in the Jasper video, walking down people in their fields like the hills have eyes, like, it doesn't matter really, if you're not going to do anything to stop any of that. So, like, be insulted by it, but you're insulted because the Israel right is doing what it always does, which is says, we're going to grab all that land and no one's going to stop us.

Emma Vigeland (16:06)

And the reason.

Matt (16:06)

And they have.

Emma Vigeland (16:07)

Right. And the reason that they're even protesting here, I would argue, is probably because they are much more interested in seizing the Gaza Strip and building this, like, capitalist casino thing that Trump keeps talking about. I mean, he's brought Jared Kushner back into the fold. And we played the clip of him at Harvard around six months into the genocide, talking about the value of the real estate on the Gaza Strip being a beachfront property. I mean, you see how just 50 miles north, Israelis are playing volleyball in the zone of interest country, and just down miles beneath them, a genocide is happening. And that coastal property is quite valuable to them. Although, interestingly, the yellow line. The yellow line that Israel is drawing here, it's their farmland that Israel had been occupying the more fertile areas.

Matt (17:06)

Right now, they pushed them up against the beach.

Emma Vigeland (17:08)

Yep. So that is another obviously colonial tactic is to continue to push the occupying population into smaller and smaller territories.

Matt (17:19)

Makes them easier to starve again later.

Emma Vigeland (17:22)

So to translate that, their only concern there is that this might get in the way of the Abraham Accords efforts and the enrichment of Trump and their buddies with their new Middle Eastern friends. This has nothing to do with protecting the Palestinian people. Um, we'll continue to monitor this. Monitor this as well. But they it this. None of this is going to change unless we cut off arms and cut off support. You know, you hear the. There was like, some Zionist podcaster that was saying, we don't need you. Like, like insulting JD Dance. We didn't play it.

Matt (18:01)

But no more Iron Dome, no more none of that. You want to try that sink or swim.

Emma Vigeland (18:06)

Exactly. I would love if we had policy that followed through on those statements. But they're so arrogant because they know that Zionists have bought our politics here in the United States. And even if they say that, even if they act like they're strong without US support. They need us.

Matt (18:24)

The amount of hysterics you'd see if Iron Dome funding was significantly threatened. I'd like to see it. I welcome that. That's called leverage.

Emma Vigeland (18:34)

In a moment we'll be talking to estad. But first a word from two of our sponsors. We all know that there are a lot of multivitamins out there and many companies are making big bold claims but keeping their proprietary formulas secret and it leaves you to wonder what is real. Well, Ritual is different. Their essential for men 18 multivitamin is science backed and made with traceable and bioavailable key ingredients. They share the source supplier scientific research behind every active ingredient so you know what you're putting in your body and why. That is incredibly helpful because you know you see those vitamin gummies you're like what's in this? And sometimes some of like these supplements, they don't necessarily have the most transparency but Ritual provides that for you. It's a science backed multivitamin for men 18 and older with high quality and traceable key ingredients in clean bioavailable forms. Sam is a daily user of this and is very much happy that Ritual has this subscription service so that he never runs out and never has to worry about it. It's a science backed multivitamin as I mentioned it has omega 3 DHA to support heart and brain health, vitamin D3 to support normal muscle and immune function. Their Essential for Men 18/ multivitamin contains 10 key nutrients and two delayed release capsules designed for optimal absorption per day. It's designed to be gentle on the stomach with a minty essence in every bottle that helps make taking your multis actually enjoyable. Essential for Men is third party tested for heavy metals and clean label project certified so you know you can trust what you're putting in your body. These vitamins are vegan, non GMO project certified gluten and major allergen free and made traceable. It's HSA FSA eligible with a seamless checkout experience so you can save when you shop with pre tax dollars. Essential for Men is a quality multivitamin from a company you can actually trust. Get 25% off your first month for a limited time at ritual.com majority that's ritual.com majority majority for 25% off your first month. Again, that's ritual.com majority for 25% off your first Month. Visit ritual.com majority to start ritual or add Essential for Men to your subscription today. Link down below in the Video and episode description and at Majority fm. And lastly, I would like to thank Oneskin for sponsoring today's episode and my morning and nighttime routine. Oneskin sent me the OS1 face, a moisturizer and longevity serum in one and their OS1i which is a concentrated formula to deal with the delicate skin around the eyes. You gotta get in a little eye cream if you're worried about crow's feet and preventing that kind of thing in the future. They have great texture, creamy texture. It's dense but it's not too heavy. It's and you just need a tiny bit to cover your whole face when you're looking at the using the face moisturizer. One Changing seasons means harsher air, drier skin and the after effects of travel and summer sun damage catching up on your skin. That's sometimes a problem for me. I've been known to like to lay out in the sun a little bit. I'm trying to beat that addiction. But one skin is helpful in trying to. Yeah, a little bit. It's not good for me, but I just like to be tan. I don't know what to tell you. And then I have to fix my skin later. One Skin is helping me do that as we speak. I'm early on in incorporating it into my ritual, but I've already really seen some benefits as well. My skin is feeling really good today and I used both of the serums last night and the OS one Face this morning. Every formula is dermatologist tested at Safe for Sensitive skin and NEA approved delivering powerful results with skin health in mind. The packaging is great, it's got this reusable shell. You just need a couple of pumps and it goes on smoothly and easily this season. Don't just moisturize. Support your skin at the cellular level with Oneskin for a limited time. You can try one skin with 15% off using code majority at OneSkin co. That's 15% off OneSkin co with Code Majority. After you purchase they will ask you where you heard about them. Please help us and tell them the Majority report sent you. Try one skin today again. That's 15% off. OneSkin with the code majority at www.oneskin.co. link down below in the video and episode descriptions and at Majority fm. Quick break and then we will be joined by aste. We are back. And we are joined by Asted Herndon, new host and editorial director at Vox and political analyst at CNN Estad. Welcome back to the show.

Asted Herndon (24:59)

Thank you for having me.

Emma Vigeland (25:00)

I'm pumped to be here I'm pumped to have you. Congratulations on leaving the New York Times. Would you describe this as your Jerry Maguire moment heard round the world?

Asted Herndon (25:10)

Oh, you know, it was time. I mean, I really enjoyed working at the Times. I've been there for seven years. I was 25 when I got there. I was. My mom was telling me, like, she was, like, recounting the day I got the job. And it made me remember, like, you know, there are ways that I want to explore my own journalism past. The premise of Time subscriber. There's a whole new world out there in terms of media. And I just thought at this moment, earlier this year, I was like, if you do another election cycle here, you're like, really? Capital letters a stead nyt. And I don't need to be that for my whole life. So I'm glad to try to explore some new stuff. But the timing ended up being kind of comedically back to back with the Zoron profile. But it was not. I would like you to know that was not intentional.

Emma Vigeland (25:58)

Okay, good to know, Good to know. But I want to start with your profile of Zoran Mamdani. I know that, you know, being New Yorkers, we're very focused on this race. I'm sure that there are. Some of the audience, you know, is a little sick of it, but I also just don't want to understate the significance of this race because of what it means for the Democratic Party, because of what it means for Democratic socialism more broadly being introduced to the country. Just tell us a little bit about your profile of Zoron, because I even got like a text from my mom saying I really liked it, which is that's a big deal because I'm trying to make him seem a little less scared. Married to some boomers.

Asted Herndon (26:38)

Yeah, it was really. It was four times reader, you know, I was. No, I. It was fun to do. They had reached out to me on primary night right after he won and basically was like, you got till the election, kind of help us untangle this thing. And I had kind of seen it from afar, but I think, like, you know, so much of my work has been about national stuff, and also it's been about what Democrats aren't doing and kind of places of lack of inspiration and the disconnect with working class folks. They actually really enjoyed the process of seeing a proof point of someone trying to model new things and trying to show hope and inspiration or at least a different model of what politics could look like. And so I think it does have a Lot of lessons, both for Democrats nationally. But I also just think about our politics more generally. You know, the groups that Mamdani has been successful with, the ones who powered that primary campaign, ones who are powering his lead in the general election. It's not just your typical democratic socialist. I say this as someone who lives in kind of like Mamdani ville. His unique candidacy is that you're getting your young folks brought in, you're getting your more traditional leftist progressive, but you're also getting my neighbors, like folks who have lived there for 40 years, people who feel pretty distant from Democrats, people who like Donald Trump, first generation folks who see no difference between Donald Trump and not. No difference is not the right word. But they don't see a conflict between supporting someone like Donald Trump and also supporting someone like Zoran in the mayor's race. That's where he's really had his sauce in terms of expanding that left liberal coalition. And I really think, kind of because of his opponents, Adams and Cuomo, really seeding this, he's also been able to take up the anti Trump mantle too. And so even if you look across the candidates, he. He's the only one who's consistently, I mean, maybe Sliwa, but more consistently has been talking about how the city pushes back against Donald Trump. And I think that's really been underrated.

Emma Vigeland (28:34)

Also.

Asted Herndon (28:35)

The center has positioned itself so much against just being against the left, they've actually ceded the thing that combines most Democrats right now, which is Trump's unpopularity.

Emma Vigeland (28:44)

Yeah, so much there. I wanna back up to, I guess, 2024, when we last had you on in the aftermath of the election, because your reporting, especially given the outcome is people should go back and read what you were covering at the time about cost of living. And you were kind of screaming, saying this needs to be taken seriously in ways that others weren't, and that that was central to Trump's kind of appeal. And then in the wake of his victory, Zoran Mandani went to the streets and started interviewing folks about why they voted for him. And it was exactly what your reporting indicated. And then you have Alexandria Ocasio Cortez's district, like, going towards. There were many, many voters that voted AOC and Trump on the same ballot, just to give an example of, like, the dynamic you were witnessing. So let's just start it in 2024, after the election, how the aftermath of that has brought us to this moment almost a year later.

Asted Herndon (29:55)

Yeah, I mean, I think that's an important place to start. You Know, we were on this journey with our podcast, the Run up, and it was really about creating a record of what we thought a lot of people were really ignoring leading up to last election cycle. And, you know, I think that there were several things that started back in 2122 when, you know, a lot of people felt there was a legitimate inflation crisis, a legitimate immigration crisis, and felt like the Biden administration wasn't responding to. Continued as we culminated to the November race where we were in North Carolina seeing people who were the exact suburban district Democratic voter they need in a battleground state who wouldn't vote for them because they didn't take action supporting Palestinians. We were seeing these steps along the way of people's growing distaste with the party's actions, and I think even more so distaste with the process that they didn't feel like ever brought them into the room. And so one of the things that I think I'm most proud of is, like, we were at the Democratic national convention's winter, the DNC's winter meeting in 2023, early, right after the midterms. And this was the time they were making the path easier for Biden. They were kind of telling everybody it was all well and good. And we had spent the whole day just going through these folks, being like, why don't voters deserve an open explanation about this? Like, even if you do it, even if you want, you know, even if the, you know, even if there's not some clear alternative, why aren't you really, like, forefront dealing with kind of the obvious critiques we're hearing from public? And they have really walled themselves off from saying the public had any say. And so one of the things I think is happening in the post2024 moment is, at minimum, the there's a group of people who are motivated to change the party internally more than almost anything else. And so I think it's somewhat expressed in Zoran. I think you see it with other kind of more competitive races, but I think this mostly happens outside of your traditional battleground midterms races. Right? Those races are gonna be about beating Republicans on the other side. There's a looming other fight that I think is building towards the Democratic presidential primary, which is a much more open question about who the party is. And that, I think, is an unfinished conversation that they started in 2019 in that primary, but basically collapsed it because Covid hit and it just became about beating Donald Trump. Right. And so there was never a question about what an affirmative Democratic immigration policy looks like there was never an open discussion about even when they talk about economy and affordability, like I think the left has a vision of what they mean about that, but I don't think there's been like a larger kind of part, like what does the party stand for? And so Donald Trump really seized on that vacuum. Right. It's much easier to make the she's for they them and not you when they don't know what she is for. Right. And so as we that was really consistent to the voters we were talking to. It wasn't a mass love of Donald Trump. It was like a recognition that he was diagnosing problems they thought were legitimate and they thought the Democratic Party was not in a real conversation with them. Right. And so I feel like what Zoran has done after, and I think a couple other candidates have done this too. I don't even think it's strict ideological, is basically bring them in reality. If you're gonna say, if you're gonna at this point in 2025, if you're not on TikTok, if you're not doing kind of non traditional media, if you're not kind of leading from a place of acknowledging Israel's failure, particularly on the last couple years, a lot of Democratic voters, you're not even clearing the basic litmus test to talk about the other stuff. And so I think that's been the recognition now is that it's not some side issue. It's actually the ways that you gain trust and authenticity have to come through certain policy barriers. And I think that's becoming more clear.

Emma Vigeland (33:57)

The, the lack of performance of small d democracy within the Democratic Party is also essential to the story that you're telling here and what you're saying about not bringing even voters into the process or attempting to have that conversation. I think that the part of also the lack of credibility on an issue like affordability is that democracy isn't just when you show up at the midterm elections and then two years later you show up in the general presidential election. It also has to be in terms of democracy of outcomes. Right. Like that deals with affordability in when you're looking at people's economic situation. People don't feel like democracy works for them if they're not heard on like their basic cost of living situation. And then there's the democracy internally in the party that's been entirely issued. And you can go back to Bernie Sanders in 2016, also in 2020, the coalescing behind Joe Biden, where how do you go with Liz Cheney to frickin Michigan with protect democracy, we're anti authoritarian, et cetera. When you can't practice democracy internally in the party, that contradiction is also where we're why we're here.

Asted Herndon (35:19)

Yeah, 100%. I mean I tell people this like, and it's easier to say now, but you know, they were booing me for saying it then. Like the democratic premise of reelection required only kind of news interested people. Like they weren't really trying to expand the tent.

Emma Vigeland (35:37)

Nope. They were looking for the Nikki Haley voter obsessed with the Nikki Haley.

Asted Herndon (35:41)

They were kind of assuming lack of interest and lack of engagement in the election. And so under that assumption, Liz Cheney and Nikki Haley become more valuable because you're basically saying were only dealing with the kind of left, right center crowd, kind of as DC imagines. That was always ridiculous. That was always quite ridiculous. And the big disconnect they have is the obsession with kind of putting folks on that ideological scale I think really is outdated. So illusion, disillusion, news interested and not following news I think are even more helpful distinctions than trying to put everybody in those left, right, center buckets. And, and so oftentimes I would be having these moments where so many of the people we were talking to who were upset with the process, who hated both options, who wanted to kind of think differently, they wouldn't like call themselves centrists though. They wouldn't call themselves Joe Manchin supporters. And so, so many times I think we project that if you don't like D and R, then that means you're in the center. And I think that's not true. And I really think that's a reflection of a democratic system and process that has not now matched the diversity of thought in this country. And I honestly would say the diversity period in this country. And so, you know, what we were doing was really trying to show how people were upset with having to sort themselves into buckets they knew didn't fit them, they knew it. And so I think that's a different kind of framework that than so much of our other kind of politics assumes, which is that Americans are just, there's a Camp D and there's Camp Bar and those are firmly opposed to one another. I'm like, I don't really think so. I think the process of our political system forces a sorting that increases that polarization.

Emma Vigeland (37:37)

And the sorting that the Democratic Party has used has often been based on race. And a lot of that was shattered in this election. To bring it back to Zoram Mandani, you have some Voters of color who voted for Trump who are now voting for him or who voted for Trump and voted for aoc. And it's not just in New York, this is across the country. Like that assumption, there's some racism involved in that assumption. They use the same as they assume the same about Jewish voters in New York City. Oh, they must hate Zoron. Like, I mean, there's racism within the Democratic Party and bigotry or assumptions being made based on consultants. It's motivated reasoning. I get it. But like, that also has led us to this moment.

Asted Herndon (38:18)

Yeah, yeah. I mean, you can think about it in a lot of ways. Like it's the passive way to think about it is like these are people who just understand these communities through poll numbers. And so of course they don't have the. Why of course they don't have these things because they're not thinking about them in a kind of 360 texture way. But I think you're, that's, I think what you're saying is true too. Like so much of what I think there's been a discussion post election about how Democrats bring themselves to different places or bring themselves to spaces of young men and all these, all these different groups. And I'm like, well, if you're too stuck up to think that these people have genuine value, you're never going to come to those places in a good way. Right. And so some of it is a gut check about who matters. And I really think that the predominant thought of, you know, Democrats since the, I would say like an Obama era has been afforded sort of technocrat debate, class hall monitor et thing where if the facts are on their side, they kind of just went in their head. They were playing a fact driven game. And I'm like, no, there's some vibes. It's some other stuff involved too. And you can't impose your version of the world on others. Right. The Biden reaction to go back to inflation of 2021 was not to say, hey, people's concerns about the economy are correct. It was to say Biden nomics is working and they should get over it. And then we get data two years later saying the exact opposite, that they were the wrong ones.

Emma Vigeland (39:44)

Right.

Asted Herndon (39:45)

And so I'm saying, like that speaks to the natural instinct of, I think most political actors, which is not to take their fellow Americans at their word and not to trust them, but to impose a view that serves their own political purposes.

Emma Vigeland (39:59)

Well, then you have now we'll get to the present day, the Trump administration, I mean, they do the opposite. They hyper, hyper target their base. Basically only speaking to their base these days. I mean, the diarrhea video on the no Kings protesters is just for the base. Although we were showing JD Vance earlier, and it's like the way he talks in real life. It's like he's posting for young men online. And that's what it seems like that AI slot video was for, where they're just, like, trying to rile up this constituency they feel is really important to them, but they do the opposite.

Asted Herndon (40:34)

Coordinated strategy, you know, is what I would say. Like to think about their relationship with their own folks. I think you need to think about different people, you know, Like, Donald Trump is not, you know, there's one way to think about it saying, like, you know, he's trying to execute his base concerns, whatever. But I think him and Stephen Miller are mostly concerned with an expansion of executive authority and a kind of framework shift of the presidency that insulates them from political backlash. I think it's important to see, like, in a different presidency, you can think about these midterms in a totally normal way. And I think there's a lot of signs in the Trump administration's actions that they might pay an electoral cost. Like, people do not like what's happening with ice. That is unpopular. People do not like what they did with Doge. There are tariffs massively unpopular. Right. So I'm saying, like, there are legitimate things you can see as penalties that, you know, your normal politics brain would say would lead to Democrats winning, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. But the difference between this administration is their effort is to make Congress less relevant itself. You know, it's to shrink Congress.

Emma Vigeland (41:46)

And Congress is going along with saying, okay, the Republicans are so beholden to him that they are giving their power and their authority up to him voluntarily in a variety of different. The rescissions thing is insane. They're saying, no matter what budget we pass, yeah, he can do whatever he wants.

Asted Herndon (42:04)

I'm saying is Congress seeds their authority and the White House is making efforts to expand their authority. Then you should see the midterms as not necessarily the effort. That's going to be the check or balance it might be in different administrations. Their goal, the whole Project 2025 effort, is to exist outside of that check and balance. And we have two other branches of government right now being Congress and the Supreme Court, who is encouraging those actions. And so I think it puts us in a different place when we think about, like, just the strict electoral politics, because, you know, I have people come to me all the time and say, like, well, do Democrats have a chance to take back the House? I'm like, yeah, maybe, or whatever. You know, like, do Democrats or is or is. You know, surely not everyone agrees with what Trump is doing. I'm like, absolutely, I don't think so. But at the same time, does that mean that's gonna cause the type of electoral, like the type of political backlash that will force him to change his actions? I'm very skeptical and I think that to me is a structural question. Like, what is it? Like 80 something percent of the seats in Congress aren't competitive. We're still talking about such a small slice of active democracy that if I were the Democrats right now, I would blow up every rule. You know, like, I would think. I don't see how in this framework they exist as anything other than an occasional buttress to the republic to, like, conservatives. You know, I think there's such a structural advantage to write as in this current setup.

Emma Vigeland (43:38)

The, I mean, it's the gerrymandering fight is that is at the core of it. Right. But it's also the tail of, of what you're talking about. Like the idea that, that this Prop 50 effort is happening now as opposed to, I don't know, 10 years ago or whatever is. It's already over and now they're trying to mitigate the damage. But the point that you're making. And the point that you're making is key because there has to be more discussion about creative avenues given the fact that, yeah, we'll have this Prop 50, hopefully it passes in California. But the Supreme Court. We just had Ellie Mostall on earlier this week to talk about the gutting of the Voting Rights act that appears imminent. Where it seems like Republicans could add up to 19 seats in the south by all but eliminating majority minority districts.

Asted Herndon (44:32)

They, I mean, the arms race of redistricting is one that Republicans have more options to win. Prop 50 can happen and all of those things. I think Democrats, I see how they're embracing a more aggressive form of understanding, but I'm like, Republicans have more state legislatures they control, and they just are more willing to follow the President's whims. And so we're already seeing them make a big push in Indiana. And even as those state lawmakers push back, the Trump, like Trump political wing is pretty open about saying, hey, we'll try to find challengers. They're gonna, like, put internal pressure on those folks. They're right now fighting in Nebraska to take away that electoral, you know, how they do proportional. They give that one electoral vote. Yeah, yeah. To the place in Omaha. Like they were trying to get that switch last year. They'll probably have that switch come the next election. Like Republicans have been. They took the Biden years to sit around and think what they're gonna do. And they're much more. I mean, that's the big difference between first time and second time. There's no longer the team of rivals situation. Before there were opposing interests to Donald Trump, which increased the chaos, increased the leaks and decreased the effectiveness. That is not true anymore. And so you're basically talking about, about different people trying to work under the prism of Stephen Miller and Trump's fiefdom rather than it is opposing that interest.

Emma Vigeland (46:05)

And I mean we saw the amount of turnover in the first term that we're not seeing now because it's all true believers. Yep. And they're all people that are either, you know, compromised by Trump. Like I would argue that Pete Hegseth having all those skeletons in his closet is not a coincidence in terms of leverage that a guy like Trump wants over somebody, or they're absolute maniacs who are podcasters that are now the heads of the FBI and it'll never get better for them at this moment. So go all in.

Asted Herndon (46:34)

That's what I'm saying. I mean if he, at this point, the folks he's a simple owe themselves to him.

Emma Vigeland (46:39)

Right.

Asted Herndon (46:39)

Like these aren't people who kind of have individual political cachet. And so that is part of the Trump relationship is to hold that power. But you know, I really, I really just find it like, I really find it such a bummer because it's not ever like, even when we were out there all last year, Americans were in some agreement about the solutions Donald Trump was proposing. You know, and so it always felt that there was this looming issue because what his governing strategy versus his political diagnosis are vastly different. And so that was always the like, the saddest part to me is cuz you could see this coming and you would pose to people like, well, how will the tariffs improve your life? And they'll be like, well, he just won't do it. They'll just wave it away. Right. It was never actually about what he was saying on the stage he would do. It was about what he was saying was wrong right now. And so I get that expression of frustration, particularly as Democrats did their foolishness over the last several years. But that's so. It just felt like we were so robbed of an actual contest that was forward looking and we're now paying the consequences.

Emma Vigeland (47:54)

And a competitive primary would have allowed for their all of those things to.

Asted Herndon (47:59)

Be more forward looking.

Emma Vigeland (48:01)

And then that would have also been the performance of democracy for the public, because that would have given them a chance to weigh in. And that's what part of one of the many reasons we're here today. But like, just to return to what you're saying about the Trump administration and Stephen Miller and Trump together trying to insulate their political actions from democracy and making sure that the executive branch can act with impunity outside of Congress, Steve Bannon is just saying it here. Yeah, this clip made the rounds this morning. This is from yesterday. But let's just take a listen to Steve Bannon outright saying that Trump will be president in 2028. And we're going to disavow or we're disinterested in the Constitution on this front. We're going to try to circumvent the 22nd Amendment. You'll need to hear me say it. This is what Steve Bannon said.

Steve Bannon (49:04)

Well, he's going to get a third term. So Trump 28. Trump is going to be President 28. And people just sort of get accommodated with that.

Emma Vigeland (49:11)

So what about the 22nd Amendment?

Steve Bannon (49:14)

There's many different alternatives. At the appropriate time, we'll lay out what the plan is. But there's a plan and President Trump will be the president in 28. We had longer odds in 16 and longer odds in 24 than we got in 28. And President Trump will be the president. United States and the country needs him to be president. States we have to finish what we started. And the way we finish it, do Trump. Trump is a vehicle. I know this will drive you guys crazy, but he's a vehicle of divine providence.

Emma Vigeland (49:42)

We got, we got the. He's gonna basically say he's the closest thing to a God. And that's why, you know, all our evangelical supporters treat him like one. I mean, so let's. I don't even really know fully what to say about this, except, okay, like, Bannon is not in the administration.

Asted Herndon (50:03)

Yeah. I mean, Bannon.

Emma Vigeland (50:04)

But they talk apparently every day. And he clearly has Trump's ear on many things.

Asted Herndon (50:11)

Right. To me, Bannon's big. You know, to me, Bannon's use in understanding the world is that he is a, he is kind of a visionary of maga. I would say, and I would say even I think about a couple of years ago when he was at cpac, talking about how, you know, how he thinks that this ends with, you know, physical troops on the ground and America expanding its kind of reach. Like, we're seeing those steps happen, too, right? Like, there are ways that Steve Bannon is often a signposter of the future. So I don't know if, like, I don't know if the, you know, we don't have, like, my sense of the reporting is that they always, they want us to think that possibility exists of 2028, but we don't know if we don't know the seriousness of it. All I'm saying is by the time we'll get to that point, the effort of the second term will already have changed the game because Donald Trump as a president will have expanded his reach past, in a governing way, past anything that we've seen before. And so I think they're going to use those expansions of power to justify any type of political possibility going forward. And I'm saying that's what connects the domestic actions and the actions abroad. They want the legal fight about his authority. They wrote the laws on purpose for that fight because they think that, you know, whether it's unitary executive theory or plenary power, whatever you want to call it, like, Stephen Miller's core belief is that Donald Trump can do whatever he wants, and they need to prove that.

Emma Vigeland (51:53)

And even if you have, if you have the battle, you have a shot. I mean, the Supreme Court has proven that over and over again.

Asted Herndon (52:00)

I would not bet against them. Like, you know what I'm saying? It's unclear to me what the guardrails are. It's unclear to me what the checks are. Like, the public and all that stuff can be one, but it doesn't seem to me as if the structures have shown any willingness to stop them.

Emma Vigeland (52:15)

If you have the right Heritage foundation lawyers or whatever, and like, this Supreme Court will give you hear your case and will almost certainly give you at least some more power. They may not go all the way, but they'll tweak to allow for Donald Trump to have more power. And that just like, I guess, brings me to ice. And you've spoken, you spoke about how unpopular these ICE raids are. The impact on these communities, I feel like, can't be overstated. What we're seeing just terrorizing communities that are usually in urban areas. They're usually black or brown or poor. These are communities that were already over policed by local police. And it occurs to me that this is very much. Actually, it doesn't occur to me. I've been making this point a bunch, but this is like the federalization of Broken windows policing and decades of it that we've been seeing across the country from, you know, targeting people because of loose gang associations and putting them into databases that they can't get out of without due process. It's very similar in, like, what they're doing with immigrants. And you don't need to prove criminality. You don't necessarily need to prove that anything has been done wrong. We're just going to round you up and put you in the system because you are of this class and because you are of this ethnicity.

Asted Herndon (53:39)

Yep. And a good example of what I'm talking about in terms of the distinction between problem, diagnosis and solution. I mean, I'm from Chicago. I remember the big complaints about the surge of Venezuelan migrants over the last couple years. I think that's much different than basically unleashing a pseudo paramilitary force. And you're seeing the reactions to that. Nothing has united people more than pushing back against that stuff. I was with Mamdani at the West Indian Day Parade, and one of the reasons people are kind of skeptical that maybe he would win over some of these voters and stuff, and I'm like, they see that only as, like, black and race and whatever. He goes in there and he talks about his experience with immigration and how he understands more intimately what needs to be done to keep those communities safe and his specific focus, and he talks about a specific focus on black immigrants and blah, blah, blah, blah. And that really hits there. And so I'm saying, both politically and policy, you know, Donald Trump, I think, has overreached in a lot of different areas, and it's created space for people if they want to stand up for those communities. But all that. But all I'm saying is, like, at some point, Democrats will have to answer. National Democrats will have to answer what they think should happen about deportations, what they think should happen about deportations.

Emma Vigeland (54:51)

But you're saying.

Asted Herndon (54:53)

I'm saying they will have to answer that question at some point. But right now, they could be against what Donald Trump is doing because there is universal disposition.

Emma Vigeland (54:59)

But. But I would argue, though said that they could be a much more potent opposition if they took the Mamdani approach of making a positive case for immigration. But they won't do it. They won't do it.

Asted Herndon (55:10)

Not all of them believe it. You know, I'm like, that's not even. That's. It's not like us. You know, I don't think that's like a universal belief they're scared to share. I think they're legitimately split and so.

Emma Vigeland (55:21)

That'S a major problem. Like, I. I grew up with this notion learning about the Statue of Liberty and Ellis island and that immigrants are what make this country great. Like that is should. The idea that that's civic education can't be tapped into by the opposition party is political malpractice.

Asted Herndon (55:42)

But the. But the position of choice is to say Statue of Liberty while you're still conducting the deportation as Obama style deportation raids, while using the is. While using the language of supporting Democrats, supporting immigrants. All I'm saying is that that combo has gotten a little exposed. And so whatever they come up with next I think will look much more like a just legitimate affirmative embrace of immigration is good, or a more moderate approach where they're being more comfortable with saying, like, okay, we're down with these means of ice or this means of deeper or whatever. But I don't think the kind of say one thing, do another, which is what they've been doing, is gonna last through that next primary.

Emma Vigeland (56:29)

Lastly, before I let you go, I would love just your take on the brewing fight over leadership on the Democratic Party. I mean, Schumer is like a dead man walking, it feels like, and it seems like he knows it, because this looming primary challenge from AOC, it wouldn't be till 2028, but it's just like an albatross around his neck. And he really messed up by capitulating in the spring. Hakeem Jeffries, I still want primaried, obviously, because of AIPAC money and because of all of this, but he at least seems to have the support of the rank and file in the House. He would be. I think the only way you dislodge him from leadership is beating him in the primary. But even zooming out from that instead. What is your take on how the Democratic base is eager to change over leadership?

Asted Herndon (57:20)

Yeah, I mean, the fervor for a new perversion of the party is real. And I think that's true beyond just left. Right. I think no King's a great example about, like a kind of hardened center Democrat, which I think is even more open to the language of progressives than they were before and, you know, has really showed the party and kind of forced them into a posture of fighting in a way that they were not doing earlier this year. I think we all know that. I guess what I think in terms of the leadership fight specifically is like, you know, what is the next version? Like right now, Schumer and Jeffries represent resistance, but they don't represent opposing vision. You know, they don't represent some other version of what Democrats stand for much, much more than they just stand against what he's doing. I think that the true leaders of the party will offer both. And it will be interesting to me to see if it is my sense. And this is somewhat New York too, but Jeffrey's really even maybe more so than Schumer, I think, did himself a disservice with this Zoran stuff. And so even if you're a young person, I just don't get what, like, I don't get. I would not, in my opinion, be so far positioned against the growing lane of the party. And so I get why he's doing that because he's trying to keep his rank and file involved. He's thinking about battleground races, he's thinking about donors. But I just think it makes him more ripe of a target to be the face of the ways Democrat leadership has been a little more inadequate now. And so you see some of these early midterm candidates not committing to backing him as caucus leader. And I think that's going to be an interesting early step to see how much leeway he has. Because even Pelosi, by the end, you know, everyone was kind of openly saying there should be a change in leadership. And she was okay with that. You know, she knew that you kind of had to do that to win your races. I don't think. I don't think Jeffries has enough clout internally to withstand if that becomes the national kind of. If that becomes what a lot of primary candidates are saying, if they start embracing the talk of new leadership. And so I think that's gonna be something we can even start tracking within the next year or so. Is to say those main red to blue candidates, those statewide candidates, how are they talking about leadership will be a clearer reflection of. Of the pressure they're feeling or not feeling from base. Like, come 2028, AOC will do what she's gonna do. Like it'll be president or Schumer. We'll find out. And I'm saying earlier than that, I think the public pressure might start getting some clues that Schumer and Jeffries have passed their time.

Emma Vigeland (60:14)

And there's also this fight in Schumer's involvement and Gillibrand as the head of the DSCC in Maine too, the main Graham Platner. But it's not just Maine. It's also Michigan where they're putting up Haley Stevens because of who's just like openly courting AIPAC money and is probably, I don't know, I haven't looked at the polls but might be lagging behind McMorrow at this point. Like the candidates that they are pushing to Schumer and Gillibrand and the DSCC are actively against the bases wishes which I think accelerates what you're talking about. Absolutely.

Asted Herndon (60:49)

I don't think that. I think they're so used to leaning on electability and just telling people it has to be somebody and it's not gonna work like that anymore. And so that's not to say that, you know, a more moderate candidate can't win, but they would have to win more so than the party I think can impose them just, just you know, force them to the front. And so you get what I'm saying? Like I think.

Emma Vigeland (61:13)

No, I do because Zoron has proven you can, if you can prove you're electable as a left wing Democrat, that's part of what the momentum you create. Like people want to be associated with a winner. And the Democrats have done a great job for years of basically saying a Bernie style populist politic could never, could never win. No, no, no. But that illusion shattered and that is why they're falling apart and it's shattering.

Asted Herndon (61:36)

Even without it being left. I'm saying someone like Jasmine Crockett would not be, I would consider a leftist but would totally break the rules by running and messing up that Texas Senate race. Or there's gonna be some ways that stardom has shifted and that the desire for even for the base Democrats to want a clear expression of fight or a clear expression of lefty values or whatever. The fact that Seth Moulton is announcing he's not taking AIPAC money is the sign, you know what I'm saying? That means the median has shifted and I think that we're in the beginning stages of that. Not yet.

Emma Vigeland (62:14)

Well said, Herndon. I could talk to you for even longer, but I gotta let you go. Congratulations on your new position at vox. Everybody check out your work over there. And I can't wait to see what you come out with in the coming weeks. Appreciate your time today.

Asted Herndon (62:29)

Appreciate you having me. Have a great day, y'.

Sam Cedar (62:30)

All.

Emma Vigeland (62:31)

Thanks, you too. All right, folks, with that we're probably going to just wrap up the free part of the show and head into the fun half. Before we go though, we have, we have a limited edition shirt merch hat situation. I could have said that more cleanly, but the Emmajority report hats and shirts are back. Now we had a clay shirt that we ended up just doing gray. So this is Actually, a new version of the ammajority shirts. This charcoal gray one, but we kept the blue. We got a charcoal gray. I think it looks pretty sweet.

Sam Cedar (63:15)

That hat is the best.

Asted Herndon (63:16)

Majority port hat. The gray Emma Majority.

Emma Vigeland (63:18)

The gray emmajority Report. I'm glad you say that. I totally agree with that. You can get that one. You can get the blue shirt. I mean, we also have the max left hats up there.

Matt (63:30)

What does it mean? Pre order? Does that mean.

Emma Vigeland (63:31)

Oh, yes, I should say that you can pre order it through. I should have this in front of me sometime in November.

Matt (63:42)

We'll ship mid November, it looks like.

Emma Vigeland (63:44)

Yeah, but I have. Okay, so basically. Okay, here we go. The pre order runs through Monday, November 3rd, and orders are going to be shipped before Thanksgiving. So head over to shop. Majorityreportradio.com if you would like the limited edition and Majority Report shirts. Matt, what's happening on Left Reckoning?

Matt (64:08)

Yeah, Left Reckoning. We had a great show with Dan o' Sullivan talking about the mob, organized crime, and how it is a sort of hidden constituency in sort of the MAGA coalition. Al Capone, the Kray twins over in the uk. So check that out. Really fun discussion with Dan.

Emma Vigeland (64:26)

Awesome. All right, we will take your calls. We will read your IMs in the fun half. See you there. Okay.

Asted Herndon (64:35)

Emma, please.

Emma Vigeland (64:36)

Well, I just. I feel that my voice is sorely lacking on the Majority Report.

Sam Cedar (64:40)

Wait, whoa. Look, Sam is unpopular. I do deserve a vacation at Disney World, so. Ladies and gentlemen, it is my pleasure to welcome Emma to the show.

Emma Vigeland (64:49)

It is Thursday.

Asted Herndon (64:51)

I think you need to improve it.

Emma Vigeland (64:52)

For sale? Yes, please.

Sam Cedar (64:54)

I'm going to pause you right there. You can't encourage Emma to live like this. And I'll tell you why. So was offered a tour. Sushi and poker with the boys. Tour, sushi and poker with three boys who was offered a tour.

Emma Vigeland (65:09)

Yeah.

Sam Cedar (65:09)

Sushi and poker with three boys.

Emma Vigeland (65:12)

What?

Sam Cedar (65:12)

Twerk, sushi and poker.

Emma Vigeland (65:14)

Tim's upset.

Sam Cedar (65:15)

Twerk, sushi and poker with two boys. It was offered with twerk sushi and that's what we called the bids. Twerp. Sushi and poker.

Emma Vigeland (65:25)

Right.

Sam Cedar (65:26)

Twerk, sushi and poker.

Emma Vigeland (65:28)

We're gonna get demonetized.

Sam Cedar (65:29)

I just think that what you did to Tim pool was mean free speech. That's not what we're about here. Look at how sad he's become now. You shouldn't even talk about him. I think you're responsible.

Emma Vigeland (65:40)

I probably am in a certain way. But let's get to the meltdown here.

Sam Cedar (65:44)

Twerk, sushi and Poker with the boys.

Asted Herndon (65:47)

Oh, my God.

Matt (65:48)

Wow.

Sam Cedar (65:49)

Sushi. I'm sorry. I'm losing my mind. Someone's offered with twerk. Yeah. Sushi and poker with the boys.

Asted Herndon (65:54)

Logic.

Sam Cedar (65:55)

Twerk. Sushi and poker with boys. I think I'm like a little kid. I think I'm like a little kid. I think I'm like a kid. Twerk. I think I'm like a little kid. Think I'm like a little kid. Add this debate 7,000 times. A little kid. I think I'm like a little kid. A little kid. I'm losing my mind.

Emma Vigeland (66:10)

Some people just don't understand.

Sam Cedar (66:12)

So I'm not trying to be a dick right now, but, like, I absolutely think the US should be providing me with a wife and kids.

Emma Vigeland (66:20)

That's not what we're talking about here, all right?

Sam Cedar (66:25)

It's not a fun job. Twerk. That's a real thing. That's got a real thing. Real thing. Willie Walker work. That's a real thing. That's got a real thing. That's a real thing. That's a real thing. Real thing. That's a real thing. That's offered.

Emma Vigeland (66:40)

Coming.

Sam Cedar (66:41)

Joe Rogan has done it again. That's a real thing. Oh, I think he might be blowing it out of proportion. Real thing. That's a real thing. That's poker. Let's go, Joey. Sushi and poker with the boy. Take it easy. Sushi and poker. Things have really gotten out of hand. Sushi and poker with boys. You don't have a clue. Clues to what's going on live YouTube.

Emma Vigeland (67:08)

Sam has the weight of the world on his shoulders. Want to do this show anymore?

Sam Cedar (67:13)

Anymore.

Emma Vigeland (67:14)

It was so much easier when the majority report was just you.

Sam Cedar (67:19)

Let's change the subject through. Rangers and Knicks are doing great now. Shut it up.

Emma Vigeland (67:23)

Don't want people saying reckless things on your program.

Sam Cedar (67:25)

That's one of the most difficult parts about this show.

Emma Vigeland (67:28)

This is the pro killing podcast.

Sam Cedar (67:30)

I'm thinking maybe it's time to would bury the hatchet.

Emma Vigeland (67:32)

Left his best trump.

Sam Cedar (67:34)

Pilot twerk. Don't be foolish and don't tweet at me. And don't the way Emma has cucked all these people.

Emma Vigeland (67:41)

Love it. That's where my heart is. So I wrote my honors thesis about it.

Sam Cedar (67:46)

She wrote an honest thesis. I guess I should hand the main mic to you now. You are to the right of the UN policy.

Emma Vigeland (67:54)

We already found Israel.

Asted Herndon (67:55)

Dude.

Emma Vigeland (67:55)

Are you against us?

Sam Cedar (67:56)

That's a tough question I don't have an answer to. Incredible.

Emma Vigeland (68:04)

Theme song.

Sam Cedar (68:05)

I bumbler Emma Vilan Absolutely. One of my favorite people, actually. Not just in the game, like, period.