← The Majority Report with Sam Seder
The Majority Report with Sam Seder
3680 - The Left Progressing & the Hollow Center w/ Jeet Heer
00:52:07
Loading summary
Transcript108 lines
- [00:03]
A
The Majority Report with Sam Cedar where every day's 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 Cedar Foreign. It is Friday, July 3, 2026. My name is Sam Cedar. This is the five time award winning Majority Report. We are broadcasting live to tape steps on the industrially ravaged Gowanus Canal in the heartland of America. On the program today as we celebrate the federal celebration of July 4th on the 3rd because everybody deserves a three day weekend. Ladies and gentlemen, Jeet here, national affairs correspondent for the Nation magazine, host of the weekly nation podcast the Time of Monsters. Also on the program today. That's it. Why? Because this is July 3rd, but we're celebrating July 4th where everybody's off. And I've pre taped this on Thursday. That is the 12 hours before. You're seeing it now probably. I mean not exactly 12. That would be a mid ten fingers at the timing of this recording. Exactly. What's that? I said I still have 10 fingers at the time. Oh, that's right. Yeah. Brian's going to go off on fireworks and so he probably you will have to have like some type of prosthetics by the time he comes back to work on Monday. I'll go with the hook. Yeah. They. But yes, we're off. But Jeet and I recorded this last night and here it is for you coming up in a moment. You know, enjoy the weekend. I've never been a huge July 4th guy, I gotta be honest with you. Like the fireworks, you know what the fireworks are about?
- [02:36]
B
Yeah.
- [02:38]
A
They're like literally glorifying war and it's the dui, the number one DUI day. Is that right? I'm pretty sure that's at least in my family.
- [02:48]
B
It was.
- [02:52]
A
But there was stiff competition to be fair.
- [02:55]
B
Right.
- [02:55]
A
I mean there's also Flag Day, there's also Tuesday. A lot of the days that end with day.
- [03:02]
B
Right.
- [03:02]
A
Big competition. But that's up in Maine. Like what else you get to do? I know you're gonna do run over a moose. The moose will be better off than your car. Exactly. There's not. You know, but I hope you have a good fourth of July. I don't know. I mean we saw the stuff from like America 250. The whole country seems to be talk about the Trump malaise. Coincidentally, Jimmy Carter was also I guess there was an election that year. 76. That was probably Ford was still, it was probably still Ford. So the malaise didn't kick in until later, but there is a Trump malaise. And, you know, also there's some problems with our country, but you can still celebrate a birthday, you know, so have fun at barbecue. Stay safe. We will be back live on Monday. I don't know who Emma's got in there. I will be back live, probably in and out, like in. In a week from today. I'm on special assignment. And you'll hear more about that probably in about a year. I'll tell you about it. In the meantime, before we get to G, we talk about this week. That was. This stuff is pretty amazing. Have you tried any of this? We got a new. We got new tinctures. Our friends at Sunset Lake. Oh, you did take that. Oh, the Focus. How was that Focus?
- [04:35]
B
The Focus one was good.
- [04:37]
A
I took that during the show, but I took the sleep one. That was phenomenal. That was phenomenal. Full night's sleep.
- [04:43]
B
Yes.
- [04:45]
A
I did too, actually. Hey, folks. Our friends up at Sunset Lake Farms have sent us new tinctures to try. We're excited to share them with you. Introducing Sunset Lake's new Saba Day oils infused with hemp derived terpenes. I know about the terpenes from hemp and these. These taste like. Yeah, like, like the other stuff. Now, what are terpenes you're asking? Well, they're aromatic compounds in both hemp and cannabis plants that give the plant its unique effects profile. And when used just right, the terpenes can help make your Saba day experience more uplifting and focused. Or if they're formulated correctly, more relaxing and easy. They sent us three different versions. The Focus Sabade oil with terpenes combines Sabade oil blended with sativa terpenes to support clarity and jitter free energy. Sativa. I can't remember what the rhyme is, but indica is in the couch. In the couch. That's the way I remember that. So I'm more of like a sativa style. Yeah. Terpenes guy. The Relax Saba Day oil with terpenes blend Saba day oil with hybrid terpenes to promote a sense of calm and ease. Great for any time of the day without feeling weighed down. And this is. This is why the sleep one works. The Sleep Saba Day oil with terpenes is Seba Day with Indica terpenes to support a restful night's sleep without using melatonin or other sedatives. It worked.
- [06:35]
B
It does work. And melatonin gives me the craziest nightmares I get.
- [06:39]
A
Exactly.
- [06:40]
B
Yes.
- [06:41]
A
That's exactly what happens to me.
- [06:43]
B
Yeah.
- [06:43]
A
The dreams I get are just completely out of control and I can't, it's too much.
- [06:48]
B
I wake up stressed.
- [06:49]
A
It's too much. I have a new and this is what I'm doing now is I take, I still use the good night oil but for the most part I'm using the goodnight gummies. And now I'm going to rotate in this sleep oil and then I'm done.
- [07:07]
B
That one's like sugar free.
- [07:09]
A
I haven't had to take Ambien in weeks. I'm not going to lie. I'm not saying this because we're doing ad read. You've had more energy this week, right?
- [07:17]
B
You have, right?
- [07:18]
A
You've been more vital. Yes, folks, no guarantee that you're going to get more vital. But head on over to sunsetlake sabade.com use the coupon code TERP26 to save 25% on the Sabad oils. And with terpenes the sale ends July 7th midnight Eastern Time. See their site for additional terms and restrictions. Honestly, this stuff, I haven't tried the focus yet and I haven't tried the relax. But the sleep man, forget about it. I'm golden. Quick break. When we come back, I'll be talking to Jeep hears G here rather national affairs correspondent for the Nation, host of the weekly podcast Nation Time of Monsters. And we'll be talking about, I have a feeling, one of Jeet's pieces on the Democratic establishment. It's an interesting time right now, particularly for someone who is as old as I am. Be right back. We are back, Sam Ceder on the Majority Report. It is a pleasure to welcome back to the program the host of Time of Monsters or co host I should say, and national correspondent for the Nation magazine. Here is here. Are you the co host of the Host?
- [08:47]
B
I'm the host. I mean I have like rotating guests but.
- [08:50]
A
Okay. Well so the host, the host. We are of course pre taping the day before the, the day before the official celebration or I should say the, the extra day off we get because of the fourth. Because it falls on Saturday. Yeah, I want to talk about the 4th. We'll get there in a little bit and maybe we can even talk about the. Really did I will ask you if you got down to the 250th celebration, the National State Fair on the Washington Mall. I'm going to guess you didn't.
- [09:29]
B
I did not know. I'm looking forward to President Trump delivering a long MAGA speech in 107 degree weather.
- [09:40]
A
Yes, that should be rather, it's. You're going to have a lot of air conditioning there. But. All right, before we get to the fourth, let's talk about obviously the, the big news. Really. It's, it's been the past two weeks and, and it, and it has been big news certainly like in our worlds. I, I don't know how much this is leaking out to non sort of like political people, but we're talking about primaries and we're talking about the response of the establishment Democrats. The Democrats have really basically controlled the party to both the New York primary results last week where you had three DSA members get elected to, or I should say two DSA members, but arguably three Democratic socialists are elected to the House.
- [10:38]
B
Or I believe we call them fellow travelers.
- [10:40]
A
Yeah, exactly. And, and, and we should say there's been three incumbents and we had one in, in Denver on Tuesday. Three sitting Democratic incumbents who have been dislodged and ones who, you know, DeGette was sort of like a backbencher of some sorts, despite the fact that she'd been there for forever, like, but you had two people who were extremely well financed. Dan Goldman had a ton. And Espion, who was the chair of the Hispanic Caucus. There are other races and ones that we should talk about. But you wrote a piece of, about the reaction of the establishment and it really has been fascinating. And there's also like a quality of Keystone Cops to it, but do tell.
- [11:37]
B
Well, I mean there's. The DSA is doing very well. Candidates endorsed by Mamdani are doing very well. Just generally insurgents are doing well. I mean, I think we're seeing like a much higher than normal level of incumbents losing. And the sort of people who don't like this are the sort of establishment wing of the party and they are like freaking out. And I think the freaking out itself, I mean, we will maybe come back to like what is actually happening, what the voters are saying, because I think that's the really significant part. But I think that there is a very amusing and noteworthy thing which is that now people who like, are senior, like, you know, ran the DNC where like advisors to presidents, presidential candidates are now talking like the Green Party. Like, they're saying like, you know, we need a split, we need a schism. This is James Carvel, you know, who's like, admittedly not been involved with, you know, actual politics for all, but was like, you know, very close to the clintons in the 1990s. And also to the Hillary Clinton campaigns. And he, like, actually said, like, you know, like, we need the DSA people to leave the party. And I think it's very interesting because on previous occasions when it was the left that was talking about leaving the party or, you know, creating third parties, Carville took a very different line. He basically, you know, blamed Ralph Nader for the loss in 2000 as, you know, like, talked about Cornell west as a threat to the Constitution by running again. And so it's a fascinating reversal. I believe Harrison, you know, had been head of the dnc.
- [13:36]
A
Jamie Harrison.
- [13:37]
B
Yeah, Jamie Harrison, yeah. You know, like, did a long tweet where he basically said, you know, that DSA people need to leave us alone, like, start. Start your own party. And, like, it is such a contrast between what we normally hear, like, before elections, which is Democrats have to be a big ten party, vote blue, no matter who. If you don't like the candidate, you know, like, hold your nose, you know, like, do the right thing. And to couple with that. I mean, like, I think interestingly, like, you know, increasing, like, sort of like, attacks on people who've won primaries. Right.
- [14:17]
A
Like.
- [14:17]
B
Like Platner, like, you know, if you look at someone like Neera Tanden, who runs the center for American Progress, had been advisor to Hillary Clinton and Joe Biden, like, she's, like, constantly kind of like, running down Platner and suggesting his weaknesses, which is, like, normally, like, not what an establishment Democrat does.
- [14:35]
A
Right.
- [14:35]
B
Like, for, like, a crucial kind of se. You know, so it is fascinating that, you know, like, after 30 years of accusing anyone that on the left of being spoilers is often unfairly, I would
- [14:50]
A
add
- [14:53]
B
this cohort, like, they are using the, like, total tactics of schismatic spoilers.
- [14:58]
A
Yeah. It's fascinating. They're literally saying, go become spoilers. And I guess the idea is, I mean, there's so much to this that I find really fascinating. And of course, yes, this is sort of like the second order part of it, but it also is, like, very indicative of where. Where they. Their analysis without offering their analysis. But I would also include into. You mentioned Neera Tanden in terms of planner Janet Mills is out there doing ribbon cuttings with Susan Collins.
- [15:34]
B
Yeah.
- [15:35]
A
And has not even called Platner back. I mean, it's not like Platter hasn't tried. Hasn't called Platner back. They. What. What one part of it reminds me of is Puma. Do you remember Puma?
- [15:51]
B
Yes.
- [15:51]
A
In the wake of.
- [15:54]
B
I think some Puma people might actually be involved with the current stuff, I would imagine.
- [15:58]
A
And just to remind people, when Barack Obama won the primary in 2008, Hillary Clinton's people were very, very, very angry and they perceived him as an upstart. It wasn't his turn. And you started, I mean, I remember this vividly because I was getting so many emails, you know, at Air America, people just intensely angry, a saying he's not going to win. Which it turned out he was not the case. He actually did win.
- [16:31]
B
I became the only Democrat to twice win the popular vote since fdr.
- [16:36]
A
Indeed. And so he not only won, he also, I mean it didn't necessarily redoubt to other people. You know, that's another problem with Obama. But PUMA meant party unity my ass. And they were identifying and we know in terms of actual, just sheer numbers, more Hillary Clinton supporters supported John McCain in the general election than Bernie Sanders supporters supported Donald Trump in the 2016 election. And what's like, I'll give you another
- [17:16]
B
example which is like very similar to the, the PUMA thing. I mean when Bernie Sanders ran in 2016 and 2020, to me the biggest threat was always, you know, not that Bernie would lose if he got the nomination, but the explicit threat that the center swing of the party had, which is that if Bernie gets a nomination, we will run Michael Bloomberg, Michael Bloomberg, who has a billion, can run his own self finance campaign and we will like, you know, ensure that our Republican would win rather than Bernie Sanders. So I mean ladies, consistent patterns of this group which is, you know, like this, like either they control the party or no one does. Like, like it's like a sad slogan in Syria, you know, like, like either I rule or I destroy the country. Either they rule or they will destroy the party. Now I mean the sort of analytical aspect of this, I think it's a writer named John Schwartz who sort of coined the term. It's the iron law of institutions, which is that when you have certain institutions, the people who run them would rather lose overall power but still control the institutions than win by ceding power to another group, by sharing power or even becoming junior partners. I think that that is exactly what is going on there. I mean, in my column I sort of compare this to the devil or Satan as portrayed in Paradise Lost where the devil has the slogan it is better to reign in hell than to serve in heaven. Well, for people like James Carville and Neera Tandon, it is better to reign over a losing party because if they, if they purge the left, they will lose. Right? And they know this, it's better to reign over a losing party than to be servants in a winning party.
- [19:12]
A
I mean, this is what's, what's fascinating because there's, there's so many different lenses in which you can look at this. Ideological lenses. And then just as you say, the, the iron law of institution. I thought it was actually Kevin Drum, but you may be right at Jonathan Schwartz. But nevertheless, the. That is completely generic, a dynamic that's completely generic or I should say secular relative to politics, maybe with a company, maybe with, with a team of any sorts.
- [19:44]
B
What could I even imagine? I mean, I think there were people on the Republican Party who might have preferred to lose with Ron DeSantis or Jeb Bush than to win with Trump because they would then still control the Republican Party. Right?
- [19:57]
A
Yes. And I always describe that as really what you have is just two players in the same industry, you know, Coke and Pepsi just fighting it out. There's, you know, and in this instance, we definitely have two players within the same industry. Right. Within the Democratic Party. But they are very, very different ideologically. And also in terms of power. I mean, what's, what's. So let's break down just a little bit about, like, try and analyze a little bit what, what the electorate is saying, because I think.
- [20:33]
B
Yeah, yeah, yeah. No, I mean, I mean, I, I do think that that, I mean, like, I think the James Carville stuff is funny and, and it could, could be quite dangero. Like as with Danny Mills, these people do actually have the power to sabotage elections. They certainly have a lot of access to the media. And I do think that we have to see them now as like open and explicit saboteurs.
- [20:55]
A
I would agree. I agree. And what I also, you mentioned the media when you watch cable television. None of what the three major examples we brought up, like PUMA and the idea that Bloomberg would have been, you know, would have been drafted to run against Bernie Sanders by many of the Clinton supporters. You could even go to like, you know, Joe Lieberman. But there this is. And then all of these things are not.
- [21:27]
B
I mean, the role that he played, like Como, you know, lost the primary and then ran, he tried to do what Bloomberg wanted to do. So there's a clear pattern. They, if they don't control the party, they will try to sabotage the actual Democratic winner of the primary, the actual Democratic nominee.
- [21:46]
A
And I think there's one more element of it, but let's revisit it after we talk about what the voters are saying, because it is both the petulance, the PUMA Ing is indicative of how hollow they're. To the extent that they have an ideology, whether they call it moderate or centrist, whatever it is, corporatist, conservative. How hollow it is because the response is also indicative. Both. Their response is both indicative of what is happening with the voters, but also indicative of how bankrupt they are in terms of offering a different vision to voters, even though they have made the assessment that the voters want something very different. And so let's talk about that. There's. There's two. It seems to me that there's at least two or three different dynamics that are happening within the Democratic Party. There is clearly a. An anger at the leadership of the Democratic Party. I mean, the brand is in the toilet. You see Democratic approval ratings early in the 30s. The. That means that Democrats have a problem with Democrats, not so much that Republicans do, because they always do. There is a real sort of anger towards the leadership.
- [23:09]
B
Yeah, no, and that's a very new development. I'll credit Josh Cohen, who I think has been on your show and who writes for the Nation occasionally. But he basically noticed the fundamental fact is that for the first time in nearly 50 years since the Carter presidency, you've had the Democrats had a president that was not popular with his own party. You know, like, when Bill Clinton left, you know, people didn't like the Monica Lewinsky thing, but he's a broadly popular president. Certainly Barack Obama, when he left, was, you know, the most popular living American. The. With Joe Biden, you look at polls like people, you know, like, it's hilarious to look at, like, he has, like, the lowest poll rating of, like, any former president. Like, you could. I think there are people who ask who's the best president? And like, Obama won overwhelmingly, you know, got twice as many as, like, Trump or Reagan, but then, like, way at the bottom with 2% of people saying he was the best president is like Joe Biden. So, so. So the representative figure of the establishment right now is Joe Biden, who had a failed presidency. I think that, like, is a huge factor. I think that people also are rightly angry because they have seen, they have supported, like, the establishment Democrats and what have they gotten? The Democrats have won the presidency seven out of the nine presidential elections. The popular vote, they've won. But you get a Supreme court that is 6, 3 on the Republican side, and that is like overturning, you know, Roe v. Wade is overturning civil rights. So people like, on the Democratic side are seeing, like, you know, we've been the good soldiers. They actually have come up Democratic Party voters have come out and voted and like, you know, the actual popular vote for the better part, you know, like of this century, the Democrats have done well, but they have not been rewarded. And I think that also is sort of fueling a lot of this anger along with like everything associated with, with the Biden presidency. The fact that he seemed to have indicated he's going to be one term, you know, in ambiguous ways and then, you know, like ran again despite what the voters wanted and also, you know, was doing a lot of stuff with, I mean, the other elephant in the room is Gaza, right? Taking a policy that was like, wildly unpopular. So yes, the Democratic Party base is very angry and people like often analogize it to this is the Tea Party moment. But as against the Tea Party, which had, you know, had a grassroots base but was also like, strongly directed by the Koch brothers and by like, you know, the plutocrats. This is an actual grassroots, like, anger and like the money side of it, like in all these campaigns, like the establishment Democrat had like by far the greatest amount of money. And often at the tail end of these races, like, you get a lot of super PAC money, APAC especially that goes in. But because, you know, like apac, you might as well be taking money from nambla, right? So, you know, like, yes, I'm running a campaign that is enormously well funded by APAC and ambla, but for some reason the voters don't want it.
- [26:31]
A
Let, let's go through those, those at least those two big ones. And that being the, the resent of Biden. And I think a perception that, that, that is indicative of the establishment. There's a couple of things about Biden, obviously his age and I mean, we saw Dianne Feinstein, right. I mean, this is not. We've had a couple of examples of this. And so it's been brewing.
- [26:58]
B
Ruth Bader Ginsburg, I think Ruth Bader
- [27:00]
A
Ginsburg, for that matter, and Breyer tried to stre despite the fact having like prostate cancer or whatnot.
- [27:09]
B
By the way, this is the tangential but I want to start a notorious RBG thing. But for Sam Alito. Don't you be telling Sam Alito he should resign. This is. This man is as strong as he's ever been. He should like the country needs him. The country needs the notorious essay. That's what I call him.
- [27:28]
A
Like, let's keep him on there. I don't think that's going to be the case. I think he's, you know, obviously NPR accidentally reported it. I wonder how that happened.
- [27:39]
B
But we should start this. Like Sam, the man, he is like, you know, one of the greatest judges that we've ever had who can replace him? It's aegis to say that Sam Alito should resign.
- [27:52]
A
I think, frankly, his wife wants him to resign, so I don't think that type of popular appeal will work, but I'm game for it. But back to the, that notion of the age thing. Yes, it was the age thing also combined with a total sort of gaslighting associated with the age. Whether it was Feinstein or whether it was Biden. People were saying, you're too old to be doing this. And there are literally staffers around them propping them up to run. So there's that level of resentment. I mean, the irony is, is that like, if you also take out that if Biden decides not to run again and had Biden actually done, I mean, he did a lot when it came to the, the, the genocide in Gaza, but all on the wrong side of it.
- [28:49]
B
Yeah, yeah.
- [28:50]
A
I mean, he was very active. I, I think the, though without those two factors, I think he could have been one of the more popular presidents. Of course, he also. The other big problem he had was that all of the benefits in the American Rescue act, which were supposed to be sort of made permanent by Build Back Better, all started to go away during his presidency. And so people, you know, it's always in anything. What's the.
- [29:23]
B
There was like, other benefits that were like, sort of clocked in to take over, like, after that, you know, when, like Trump took over, you know, like.
- [29:30]
A
Yeah, there was no, the problem is, is that he, the, those benefits went away during his presidency and so he gets the credit for them going away, not for providing them in the first place.
- [29:45]
B
We're doing. Yeah, no, I mean, this is the sort of unstated story that I don't think, like, you never get because the mainstream media doesn't want to talk about it. But one reason why I think Trump did well in 2024 and did especially well with like, untraditional Republicans, like sort of working class people of color, is that, you know, like under Covid, they actually had, you know, one of the greatest, like, welfare programs in American history with the sort of like the sort of COVID checks. And like, like Biden didn't even keep the promise to like, you know, keep those up. Like, Trump got both of people's memory of the 2019 economy and then Covid happens and, you know, like, the general sense was, well, this is beyond anyone's control, but we did get those, like, you know, a lot of, for working class Americans, a lot of their financial position actually improved in 2020. Automatically.
- [30:38]
A
We cut child poverty in half. And then we decided that was an interesting experiment, but we'll go back to increase in child poverty.
- [30:49]
B
Yeah, no, no, yeah, no, I mean, so, so, so unfortunately like this actually gained the whole way everything rolled out, gave Trump a lot of credit with working class people, was like, you know, like this guy actually like did something and that, that Biden was the guy who's like taking stuff away. No, no, I, I mean, it was, but, but I mean the overall picture is of a party that is sort of discredited. And as you mentioned, like you had all these people who should have resigned in addition to Biden who were kept around because of the staffers and the staffers, you know, could hold on to their stuff. And I really think, like you said, what's the ideology and what is the thinking here? And we have to pay tribute to one of the greatest living Americans who like celebrated his 100th birthday and who's like one of your colleagues, which is Mel Brooks in Blazing Saddle, you know, where they, the people who work for the governor said, you know, like, we have to preserve Bill Brooks playing. The governor of the state says, you know, gentlemen, we have to protect our phony baloney jobs. Haram, Haram. That is the ideology here, right? Like that is a James Carville and Neera Tanden believe in their heart of hearts we have to protect our phony baloney jobs.
- [32:03]
A
And what I find interesting is that the, the insurgents that we're seeing, for lack of a better term, is very much driven in some areas by dsa, by self proclaimed Social Democrats, in other areas, not so much, but there. But you raise a really good point about the Tea Party comparison. And I think this gets lost in a lot of the analysis of what's going on. And Emma made this point in regards to Julia Sanchez, who, you know, came within striking difference distance of Hickenlooper. She was former dsa, but she gets lumped in. And the difference here is, and we also had in, in Colorado, Bennett, who was not the incumbent, but he was, he was a senator, sitting senator running
- [33:02]
B
for governor, senior establishment figure.
- [33:06]
A
Yeah, one would imagine that he would have had a machine that would have gotten him in or some goodwill that would have gotten him in. Apparently not. But the interesting dynamic here is, is that what people forget about the Tea Party. Like you say, it started as a maybe grassroots, but really, I mean, not exactly.
- [33:26]
B
It was enormously helped by the huge.
- [33:30]
A
Well, the Tea Party, the first Tea Party was actually Ron Paul's people.
- [33:36]
B
Yeah.
- [33:36]
A
And when he died out, the Koch brothers, who are big funders of Ron Paul, they expanded it. And so there was definitely anger, without a doubt. But people forget the Koch brothers at that time had bought essentially the entire voter list. They had a more sophisticated voter data analysis program than the Republican National Committee did. And so you saw the success of these Tea Party people because they're going up against the establishment figures, but they have an arsenal that rivals who they're going up against. On the Democratic side, it's much more difficult because there is no outside Koch brothers who are providing that infrastructure, except for the DSA who come with an infrastructure. So Julian Sanchez loses by just a handful, but she did not have, you know, people think like the endorsement is just like, you know, an imprimatur. No, the endorsement comes with an entire sort of like, you know, we're gonna give you people organizations, we're gonna give you phone trees, we're going to give you, you know, media. I mean, it comes with a huge toolkit. And that's what's been the difference in those races. I don't know if it's ideological. I'm curious as to your perspective on that, but it's also a function of. You've got a real operation here.
- [35:18]
B
Yeah, well, no, I mean, I think the way to think about this is in terms of the sort of hollowing out of the parties that the American parties are these kind of like big brands, but they can be. You can leverage a takeover of them. And this is what Trump did with the Republican Party. He basically took this hollowed out party discredited by the Bush administration with losing campaigns and then used his celebrity to take it over. And DSA is doing something similar, except that their leverage is not celebrity or Trump's type of money, but they're organizing thing and there's been a sort of general hollowing out of organizing. And like, I think partially because both political parties depend a lot on consultants. And then you like, you know, you use the money that you have to hire people to do things. And in particular New York City, they're sort of old machines. I hear talk about political machines, but like the old machines of like, you know, that existed back to Tammany hall into the 70s and 80s, those were like an entire life world. Like you would have like, you know, clubs that you would go to and if you needed a job, people there could help you and you had dances. People like met their Life partner there. Right. They had social events. This is an entire social world. But starting with the sort of, you know, like, rise of social media, all that social world has kind of disappeared. And a lot of the other institutions that function with the machines, like, sort of like the black churches, well, what you've seen is, like, among younger black people, like, especially among young men, they're much unchurched. So those are, like, become more like freelance voters. And some of those went over to Trump, but could also go over to Mamdani. What the DSA has is that they have actually built the only real machine that we've seen in the 21st century. And, you know, like. Like where, like, people who are in that DSA world, like, like, you know, they. They hold events, they hold lectures. You, you have dances, you have. This is like, like, where you get. And they are actually people that can go out and talk to voters. And you have, like, you know, not people who are, like, paid 25 bucks an hour to spread the message, but people I like, actually, like, believe in this. And, like, that is invaluable. Right. And so the hollowing out of the parties has made them susceptible to takeover. And in the case of the Democrats, I mean, I think that the establishment Democrats have a big problem in the sense that, like, they don't know how to organize. They know how to, like, Biden ads, they know how to, like. And in a presidential elections, they can actually get volunteers or phone banks because people hate Trump. And so they want the Republicans, but still they don't have, like, that sort of, like, actual functioning political machine.
- [38:07]
A
Yeah, it's fascinating. And it. I mean, the proof is in the pudding. You know, the leadership of the DSA has been very strategic, and where they're going to deploy these resources. I mean, this is the. This is the other thing, too, that I think is really fundamentally different. Mamdani has, you know, who I think you could argue is effectively the most sort of, like, influential figure in the DSA at this point. Maybe that's not. I don't even know if that's remotely even controversial, but was able to sort of structure where the challenges were going to happen, where they were not going to happen. And, you know, specifically, no challenge of Hakeem Jeffries. There was a real sort of, like, match between our resources, you know, and our appetite, which I think, like, that type of discipline and, you know, sobriety, I guess.
- [39:13]
B
Yeah. Is.
- [39:14]
A
It's going to be hard to maintain on some level because there is a. Obviously, people are very, very impatient, but that Level of strategy we haven't seen from like any type of movement within the Democratic Party or outside the Democratic Party where you have that type of energy, but you're also able to sort of like deploy it with deliberately.
- [39:44]
B
Yeah, no, I mean the historical analogies would be the period where that organizational energy came from things like the black churches, which as I indicated, they have been fraying a bit. And also the unions, which have also.
- [39:58]
A
Right.
- [39:59]
B
Tremendously framed. But like back in the day, like, you know, you know, we, America got the New Deal and the Great Society because, you know, you had that sort of organizational discipline from the black churches and from the labor unions and for, you know, similar groups. The DSA is the 21st century equivalent of that. And Mamdani, because he is, you know, one being the mayor of New York and is now more popular than ever, you know, has had a really good like, you know, first year. You know, he is undeniably that. And he's become more than that because like, I don't know who the Democrats have as a sort of national spokesman other than people on the left, other than, you know, like Bernie and aoc. I mean, I will admit that like Ossif, very popular and Buttigieg, very good. But, but in general, like, if you actually look at like, who are the people that the public looks to as the alternative to Trump as the people, you know, who are the trusted figures, it's very striking that three of those figures are like, you know, very much on the left.
- [41:04]
A
Well, one of the things that's also come out from this sort of like temper tantrum by the so called centrist or moderates or whatever they're calling themselves is that there is nothing there. Like they came out with their manifesto and it was literally like just platitudes. It was fascinating. Like, here's your big, here's your big moment. Roll out those things that you've been talking about and there's nothing there. And who you, who they're rolling it out for is also sort of, I mean, so much of what we're seeing, like I'm convinced now we should say AOC endorsed Abdul Al said today in Michigan. When I look at Mallory McMurra now, when she's still going out there and campaigning, it is quite obvious to me that she's not campaigning to win anymore. She's campaigning for her donors to get enough money to pay off her campaign debt. Like, I'm going to go out there and I'm going to be the person who's going to say, you Know, worried about anti Semitism or, you know, the, you know, the socialists, et cetera, et cetera. There's no one out there delivering a message like, what was Janet Mills's message?
- [42:22]
B
Yeah, no, no, I mean, I mean, again, there is no base of support for this stuff. And I mean, on the Israel stuff in particular, I mean, that is a sort of significant change. Like, you go back to the 60s and 70s, there was like a large mass of people, like Jewish Americans, we are for Israel, like, out of concern for the Holocaust, out of what happened in the 67 with the war. And there were a lot of Christian Zionists who are still around, but also diminishing. But that's very different than today where there's a poll from CNN that 52% of Jews in New York think Israel has committed a genocide. So basically, these elections, like, you know, Lander 1, in one of the most Jewish districts in the United States. So, so, so you don't have like this sort of like a mass base of support for Zionism other than, like, you know, and it's fascinating, like Jake
- [43:19]
A
Tapper is having on Dan Goldman. I mean, just in and of itself was such a weird thing. Like, Dan Goldman was, you know, a backbencher, didn't do anything that particularly distinguished himself. I mean, even as a prosecutor, even, you know, I don't remember like any standout moments from his hearings or anything really to that effect. I mean, obviously. But in any other scenario, Dan Goldman would not be interviewed after you lose the primary. Who cares? No one cares. And the idea that they're still giving this guy a platform. He had a platform. He was a US Congressman.
- [43:56]
B
Let's put it this way. If some of these candidates are, like, trying to appeal to the donor class, Jake Tapper is trying to appeal to, you know, who's going to be his future boss.
- [44:04]
A
Well, that's, that is fair. And you just wrote a great piece on Ellison in, In. In the Nation magazine, and people should check that out. But let's turn to July 4th and, and sort of like as. And I genuinely believe that, like, you know, I don't know how you would break it down and in some places, less or more as to how much the, the dsa, how much like socialism as an idea is on the ballot, as much as the things that emanate from socialism, the organizing, the. The sense that people are going to take care of each other. You know, I don't know if there's specific topics outside of Israel, but that is. That is, again, not necessarily a socialist position. That is now become a, I don't even want to say a litmus test. It really just become, I think, I think Abdul Al said it's become a Rorschach test where you basically, you know, how do we indicate whether this person has a sane perspective on the world?
- [45:12]
B
Yeah, yeah.
- [45:13]
A
Recognize up is down and down is up. But yeah, July 4th, Mamdani is apparently going to be the guy for the Democratic Party who is going to provide another way of celebrating, I guess, another vision of what America is. At its 250th birthday. He's going to deliver a speech just before Trump does from George Washington's old desk, which is in, I think it's New York City Hall. But also this week we should say just not, maybe not coincidentally, Kamala Harris, it came out that she's been in extensive meetings with him, the uncommitted folks, like obviously on a reformation tour. Like, what can I do? What do you make of that?
- [46:03]
B
Well, master of timing, Kamala Harris, once again, this might have helped in September of 2024 when people like you and I were urging she do it. But it is an indication that, yeah, she can read the polls, she can read these election results. You know, she knows that she's going to have a future, but I don't think she's going to be able to do it. But, you know, she's making the effort. But no, ma', am, damney has become this sort of political force nationally. I mean, it is very striking. Like I, you know, like we at the Nation had a 250th issue and it's a very troubling thing to have Donald Trump as the president when you're celebrating the birth of the country. Like, however ambiguously one might feel about the American experiment, still what it was like to have something to be proud of. And there's much to be proud of in the United States. I mean, you know, like you guys gave the world LeBron and Martin Scorsese. Like, you know, that's, you know, thank you props. So I say, you know, like, but there's that room. But you. It's very important to have the sort of like some sort of patriotic message both about what thing has. Things have gone wrong. But like how you want a better country. The pessimism about the country is all time high and like none of the Democrats can speak to that. I mean, one would have thought, I mean it's interesting that Obama's sort of silence on this, this moment and yeah, like he's like producing a series With Larry David, like, you're like, that's how, you know, like. And, you know, like, Obama, whatever you want to feel about him, hugely important historical figure, can articulate, you know, much of what's best about the United States. Like, so it's curious that, like, all these mainstream Democrats have gone silent and have created a vacuum for Mamdemi.
- [47:41]
A
Yeah. It is fascinating that the value of having someone who is a huge historical figure alive is that they can step in and do stuff. Now, who knows what he's doing behind the scenes in between his wheeling and dealing in Hollywood. But it is pretty striking that he is offering really nothing. Now. Maybe his.
- [48:11]
B
Maybe he's like, he's, like, creating a travesty. Like, he's going to, like, half a MAGA march on the, you know, July 4th. That is a travesty that no other president would have ever done. He's turned the White House into a laughingstock. He's like, you know, turning Washington, D.C. into this, like, gaudy bordello. You. This would be the time where you kind of built tensions because everyone knows, you know, Epstein Island.
- [48:34]
A
Right? Right.
- [48:36]
B
But at least Obama's there, you know, like, whatever you want to say. This guy knows how to deliver a speech. He knows how to think, too.
- [48:42]
A
It's like, I. I wouldn't want his politics to return. Yeah. But his rhetoric, like you would imagine he. He would deploy it. Now, maybe there's some theory, like, it'll get Trump mad or it'll awake the conservative movement, which, again, I think is just absolutely silly.
- [49:02]
B
But there's a hunger for that. I mean, that's why Mamdani is popular. Like, he's offering a positive vision of what America could be. You know, he has become the Obama figure. Like, it's such a hugely positive thing to have, like, a Muslim American mayor as a leading the largest city. This is. Represents the best of America and the Democrats, you know, like, it is, for whatever reason, Obama's silence, he's. I think he has chosen it because he does actually think it's his job to, like, step back and let the new generation rise. I. I think that's the most generous interpretable. Yes, but. Well, you know, like, his voice is really missing at this moment.
- [49:43]
A
What do you think we're going to see going forward in terms of these. I think it's quite likely we're going to see another, maybe close to half dozen, maybe a little bit less incumbents lose their seats to either DSA or progressive candidates. It's really just going to come down to like the ground game. That's what it really, it feels like. These incumbents do not have volunteers. They just don't.
- [50:18]
B
Yeah, yeah. No, no, they, they don't. And whatever, like machine politics that once existed, you know, for the reasons I indicated no longer exist. And you know, like, I mean, the other side effect is like victory builds on victory. Right? Like, you know, the fact that the DSA has won these victories now they're like growing larger than ever. If you could have your DSA of the strength that's in New York, in other parts of the country, it would become a real powerhouse within the party, without a doubt.
- [50:48]
A
Jeet here, always a pleasure. Have a great fourth.
- [50:52]
B
Yes.
- [50:53]
A
And we will see you again soon.
- [50:56]
B
Yes. As a Canadian, I want to congratulate all the Americans on their anniversary for Canada. That's very important for the United States to have sane leadership. Our survival depends on this. So. So guys, try to work a little harder.
- [51:11]
A
We're working. I appreciate it.
- [51:13]
B
Thanks, Jeet. Okay. Thank you. Somehow I'm going to get there I wasn't looking when I just got caught You've seen the truth truth in life it out won't make me feel any better yeah, I know the clock is ticking but the meds are going to kicking and my p light shin bright I get somewhere the choice is made made for the option where you don't get paid for the road that bends.