The Next Level – Episode 1033: Incentives Matter | Secret Podcast Preview
Date: November 15, 2025
Host: Jonathan V. Last (JVL)
Guest: Catherine Rampell
Theme: Political legacies, the Epstein fallout, Trumpism’s grip, and the complexities of political incentives.
Main Theme & Purpose
This special preview episode fills in for regular host Sarah Longwell (away that week), bringing in Catherine Rampell—Bulwark’s newest contributor—for her "secret show debut." JVL and Catherine traverse a range of political topics, including the lingering effects of the 2000 Florida recount, fresh revelations in the Jeffrey Epstein saga, how political incentives shape party loyalty, and speculation about potential fractures in the MAGA coalition. The conversation maintains the signature Bulwark blend of humor, candor, and sharp political insight.
Key Discussion Points & Insights
1. The Lasting Fallout of the 2000 Florida Recount
[00:00–03:49]
- Catherine opens with a story about her iconic “Revote” butterfly ballot T-shirt from the 2000 Florida recount and her rare high school interview with Teresa Lepore, the embattled supervisor at the center of the controversy.
- “My claim to fame as a teenager is that I think I got the one and only, only interview with Teresa Lepore...” —Catherine, [01:14]
- JVL argues that the 2000 recount is underappreciated as a turning point in American political culture, suggesting its acrimony set the tone for subsequent electoral disputes.
- “One of my theories is that actually the Florida election recount is an underappreciated driver of where we are today.” —JVL, [01:44]
- They draw contrasts between the civility of 2000 and the ongoing bitterness over 2020—a marked escalation.
- “As shocking as the recount stuff was in 2000… it was very civil by comparison.” —Catherine, [03:23]
2. Jeffrey Epstein’s Shadow Over Politics
[03:49–13:50]
- The pair dive into the latest batch of Epstein emails, noting both their political and salacious dimensions.
- “I feel a little bit left out because I feel like everyone else got an email from Jeffrey Epstein except for me.” —Catherine, [04:11]
- They scrutinize Larry Summers’ post-Harvard correspondence with Epstein and ponder how so many elites, despite knowing Epstein’s reputation, maintained proximity.
- “Can you imagine being a former Secretary of the treasury and still being so thirsty that you’ve got to be like trading emails with your pal Jeffrey Epstein?” —JVL, [04:51]
- “Epstein…had been arrested for some stuff and he’d already done time. And the Lolita Express was a thing everyone joked about, even in print…” —JVL, [06:16]
- Catherine highlights Epstein’s contradictory remarks about Trump and the possibility of Epstein having damaging information on the former President.
- “There is certainly a lot of hints in those emails…that there was some big dirt that Epstein had on Donald Trump.” —Catherine, [06:53]
- “Trump is the worst person [Epstein] ever met… do you know how bad you have to be to be one of the worst people that Jeffrey Epstein knew?” —Catherine, [07:12]
- Debate over Trump’s plausibility of ignorance regarding Epstein’s crimes, with detailed parsing of evidence and the investigatable nature of event guest lists.
3. Theories on Epstein’s Multiple Personae & The "Epstein Death"
[09:37–13:50]
- JVL proposes that Epstein wore several “masks” depending on his audience—more guarded or performative with public figures, candid with confidantes.
- Both JVL and Catherine express deep skepticism about the official explanations for Epstein’s death, ranking it among the most suspicious recent American events.
- “I am in general against conspiracy theories, but… the suicide of Jeffrey Epstein… I’m basically open to just about anything…” —JVL, [12:27]
- “There’s so many gaps in our knowledge. Right. About what happened or gaps in literal footage…” —Catherine, [13:50]
- They criticize right-wing media’s lack of curiosity about Epstein’s connections to Trump and widespread efforts to downplay the gravity of Epstein’s crimes and relationships.
- “There is…very little curiosity about this bombshell trove of emails that we’ve already seen…” —Catherine, [15:59]
4. The Nature of Republican Allegiance to Trump
[16:37–21:31]
- JVL floats a theory: should the GOP break with Trump, it may be spearheaded by genuine ideologues like Marjorie Taylor Greene and Lauren Boebert—not party “grown-ups.”
- “If there is a Republican break with Trump, it will actually be powered by the handful of genuine true believers in this stuff.” —JVL, [16:42]
- These “authentic” actors may prove less cynical and therefore more likely to experience genuine breaks with Trump, while power “professionals” stick it out until the bitter end.
- “The good Republicans, the ones supposed to be the grownups, will be the last ones to break with Trump because they’re only there for the power anyway...” —JVL, [17:50]
- Catherine is skeptical, recalling repeated, misplaced predictions since 2016 that Republicans would abandon Trump after pivotal scandals or legislative wins.
- “I thought…that Republicans were going to cut him loose a few different times…But then they hung around him and then the people who had turned on him were pushed out.” —Catherine, [18:28]
- They debate Marjorie Taylor Greene’s motivations for distancing from Trump and agree, “incentives do matter”—until the base or media truly shifts, the party will likely remain loyal.
- “As long as the voter base is still with Trump…it will still be hard for lawmakers to break with him…” —Catherine, [20:11]
5. The GOP’s Post-2018 Psychological Shift
[21:31–End]
- JVL concludes his thinking changed after the 2018 elections, identifying that the “tipping point” to full Trumpism had actually occurred long before, making current Republican loyalty a sunk-cost phenomenon.
- “In any normal environment, the 2018 elections would have been the kind of loss at which point the party would have started triangulating against him…But in reality, the tipping point…had gone in the other direction.” —JVL, [21:54]
Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments
- On 2000’s legacy:
- “People have largely forgotten about it because it's pre 9/11 and everything before 9/11 just sort of gets compacted into post World War II…” —JVL, [01:44]
- On being left out of the “elite” scandal:
- “I feel a little bit left out because I feel like everyone else got an email from Jeffrey Epstein except for me. And I mean, maybe that's good, maybe that's good…” —Catherine, [04:11]
- On Trump and Epstein:
- “Can you construct a reasonable defense of Trump in which Trump didn't know what was going on?” —JVL, [07:49]
- On conspiracy theories:
- “If you told me [the Las Vegas shooter] was an alien, then I would believe that. If you told me he was a lone wolf…I'm open to anything...But in the Epstein suicide, like, I'm basically open to just about anything…” —JVL, [12:27]
- On media and political incentives:
- “For some reason… very little curiosity about this bombshell trove of emails…” —Catherine, [15:59]
- On party loyalty and authenticity:
- “Somebody who believes crazy things is still operating in, in a form of good faith.” —JVL, [17:49]
- “Incentives do matter… as long as the voter base is still with Trump, I think it will be… hard for lawmakers to break with him…” —Catherine, [20:11]
- On Republican “tipping points”:
- “The party had tipped over into Trumpism and become pot-committed to it.” —JVL, [21:54]
Key Segment Timestamps
- Butterfly ballot & 2000 Recount: [00:48–03:49]
- Epstein’s political connections: [04:11–08:03]
- Parsing Epstein/Trump/Thanksgiving evidence: [08:03–09:37]
- Epstein’s “multiple versions” & performative relationships: [09:37–12:23]
- Conspiracy skepticism & Epstein’s death: [12:23–13:50]
- Media indifference to Epstein revelations: [13:50–16:37]
- Theory of GOP break powered by “true believers”: [16:37–18:28]
- Debate on when/if GOP would abandon Trump: [18:28–21:54]
Tone
The episode is consistently wry, sharp, and informed, balancing light banter and heavy subject matter with a blend of exasperation and dark humor.
Summary Takeaway
JVL and Catherine Rampell untangle a complex web of political and personal incentives—past and present—showing how unresolved wounds from 2000, the elite’s tolerance of predators like Epstein, and the internal mechanics of party loyalty converge to shape the current state (and possible future) of American politics.