Loading summary
Transcript169 lines
- [00:00]
A
You know, recommendations can be great. Maybe someone recommended this podcast and here you are. But home projects are different. If a podcast isn't your thing, you lose a few minutes. If you hire your cousin's neighbor to mount your tv, you might end up with a lopsided screen and wall damage. Maybe I know a guy. Just isn't enough for your home. That's why thumbtack works. It matches you with top rated local pros with photos, reviews, and credentials all in one place. For your next home project, try thumbtack. Hire the right pro today. Sarah, as far as I'm concerned, you're still a queer. Oh, thanks. I'm not going to remove you from queerness just because you have issues that I disagree with politically.
- [00:42]
B
That's. I appreciate that. I didn't know it was on the table.
- [00:45]
A
Andrew, you're not a queer. Congratulations.
- [00:48]
C
That's what people keep telling me. Yeah.
- [00:53]
B
Hello, everyone, and welcome to the next level. I'm Sarah Longwell in for jbl and I am here with my best friend Tim.
- [01:01]
A
And the boy voice got really high there. My mom always said she knew I was lying when my voice got really high. I did my homework.
- [01:10]
B
I just. It's not for you. I don't want to shortchange Edgar here. Egger is. But I quickly realized that if I did the best friend bit that I'd somehow be betraying jbl. And I can't put Tim above Egger in the show. It's just. It was a layer of emotion that hit me quickly.
- [01:26]
A
But Andrew Egger's here.
- [01:28]
B
He is here. Thank you for stepping in. We really appreciate it. Since JBL is out, I'm going to drive today. But that is. That means we will careen and weave wherever this show takes us because we don't have the same. JBL usually gets these things down to a science. I do them like I looked at it five minutes ago. So, gentlemen, let's start with scotus, because this is all coming out this morning. It does look, you know, we're getting this flurry of big decisions. I don't. We all have different legal podcasts we're going to do. I know Tim spoke a lot of time on this on the main pod with David French. So I don't want us to spend too, too much time on it. But I do want to say just a couple things. One is, looks like we still have birthright citizenship in this country. Which is. Which is a yay, yay good news.
- [02:12]
A
Yay for me.
- [02:14]
C
Edgar, how do you say absolutely? Yeah, I mean, and not just that we still have it, but they didn't decide it in some kind of narrow way either. I mean, really dramatic affirmation, not unanimous, but. But strongly affirmed that it is constitutionally guaranteed. So very, very hard to dislodge in
- [02:29]
A
the future, but a little concerning, I guess. Maybe not very, very hard to dislodge in the sense that Kavanaugh seemed to be on the side of saying that we could take it away legislatively. And so it seems like there have been four votes for getting rid of birthright citizenship. Had it been a bill passed through Congress signed by the president, that would have been five to four would have been a little tighter in that sense. So you could imagine, I don't know, a horrid future where we have a MAGA majority, a MAGA trifecta. They were given kind of a path towards. But I had a big defeat for Trump. But anyway, it's just worth kind of flagging that I was a little at least noted it the Kavanaugh comments to
- [03:11]
C
know maybe one thing on the other side of that though, it is not necessarily locked tight that even Alito and Thomas would have been slam dunk, you know, citizens or sorry, children of illegal immigrants ought not to have citizenship, period. I mean, if you read through their dissents, they get very squirrely. They're by far spend the most time talking about the children of temporary visitors, like people who just like the whole birth tourism thing. For people who consider the United States their home, which Thomas even suggests in his dissent might include a lot of illegal immigrants, they still believe that they would be covered or at least many of them might be covered according to the historical definition of this thing. So again, they are not. You might want them to be slam dunk. This is guaranteed by the Constitution the way all the others are. But I don't even think there's like three, let alone four, who are like Donald Trump's position is the correct position here. Who'd be ready to give it to him if you got one or two more.
- [04:09]
B
Okay, that's good. That does make me feel better because since this one is so black and white in the Constitution, you do want a Supreme Court that is capable of reading the Constitution. So I was a little, I was was with Tim. But Andrew, I think you just assuaged some of my concerns. I will say you didn't make Donald Trump feel any better because he bleeded the Supreme Court upheld birthright citizenship, which is bad for our country. But we can easily make it up in Congress through legislation with the support of the President. That has now been determined during this process. No long an unwieldy constitutional amendment is necessary. Exclamation point. Congress should start today all caps to work on ending expensive and unfair to our country birthright citizenship. They will have my complete and total support.
- [04:49]
A
Add it to the SAVE Act. Yeah.
- [04:52]
B
Do we think we're going to get a legislative act birthright citizenship effort here?
- [04:57]
A
I do not.
- [04:58]
B
Me neither.
- [04:59]
C
I hope they try, I mean like just one more thing for him to like make Republican senators lives hard about like that they know will never ever, ever become law and that it's a total exercise in futility but that he might try to extract from them as the cost of doing literally anything. That seems like it could be another fun thing.
- [05:15]
A
I agree with that. John Thune's pain is my pleasure. You know, I have a little bit of a, a narrow sadomasochism just with, just with John Thune in particular. It's something we can talk about later.
- [05:28]
B
Okay, just real quickly. NPR did this thing where it reported that Alito is retiring and then had to retract it. Tim, I don't know about you, my coms brain and Andrew, maybe your reporter brain goes to the fact that maybe somebody accidentally broke an embargo and this is perhaps not happening today, but maybe on Friday. What do we think?
- [05:46]
A
I don't think that that's what happened. I don't, I don't know. I have been of the view that Alito is a complete partisan hack and that he will be monitoring the odds of the Senate going towards the Democrats. And if it looks like there's a chance that the Democrats could get the Senate, he might retire just to guarantee that Donald Trump can replace him. I don't have any inside information to that effect. I just all of the evidence of Samuel Alito seems to me like hackery matters to him a lot and partisanship does. And he would be concerned about losing the ability to have a replacement that he approves of. So it wouldn't be surprising to me if he resigned. To me this seems kind of like more though like when I was on the Jeb campaign and we were so excited for the first debate that we had all of our like little press releases attacking our opponents, like preloaded into the back end of the website so we could see send them out really quickly and then somebody on the digital team pressed like send all or something. And so we sent out like a hundred attacks on Marco Rubio that Jeb did not actually do on the debate stage. And that was very embarrassing to me as a communications director. And to me that I think is more likely what happened with npr.
- [07:06]
B
Like there's a pre write that went awry.
- [07:08]
A
Yeah.
- [07:09]
C
It's hard for me to imagine that Alito, of all people, as he's making these decisions, like part of his calculus is, well, we'd better make sure that, you know, we tip off all of the news outlets so it can be really convenient for them and they can get their pre writes ready. And so NPR can be first, you know, first bite of the apple here, anything like that. I very much lean toward where Tim's coming from, where there's all this speculation that now might be a plausible time for Alito to retire. And so it makes a lot of sense that these guys are all, you know, locked and loaded for what they will write if and when he says he will. And, and that somebody just pushed the wrong button on the dashboard triggering, by the way, it wasn't just npr. Like VOX had a piece up that was like jumping off of the NPR News. Seemed like they had pre written their take and it was like a cavalcade of unfortunate pre write errors is what seems like the likeliest thing to me.
- [08:00]
B
Okay, I'm going to take a different position than both of you and see if test it out on you. I think that they want the Supreme Court seat as a thing to focus on for why people should turn out for them. It would not surprise me at all if they wanted to try to get a confirmation through going into the midterms. Thoughts on that?
- [08:21]
A
Maybe that Trump would want that.
- [08:23]
B
Yeah. And that Alito, like, that Alito would go along with a PR play that is meant to help Republicans electorally and therefore him leaving sooner rather than later and creating a vacancy.
- [08:37]
A
Yeah, I don't know. I, I think I said, I think that's very possible. Like I said, I think that it kind of depends. I mean, you know, also Supreme Court justices really think that they're special, you know, and so Samuel Alito's decisions might be more about what's happening in Samuel Alito's brain and what Martha Ann thinks that her husband merits rather than, than some, you know, some little gimmick like that that Donald Trump wants. But I think that he does have obvious partisan intent and there's a real risk from the Alito perspective that if the Democrats take the Senate or even if it's 50 50, that what happens if something happens to him health wise? What happens if then a Democrat becomes president in 2029? I mean, he's getting kind of old. Like you could conceivably look at a six to ten year window, like this is the time to get a clean replacement in. And I think that that would weigh on Alito a little bit. Thomas. I think luckily we can count on megalomania being the top interest in his case. He's about to be the longest running Supreme Court justice. I think if he goes into, I forget if it's next year or the following year. So I expect that he'll try to, try to do that.
- [09:49]
B
Hold on for that. I think whoever replaces Alito is going to be. Could you see all the stuff, the crap Barrett's getting from the Megyn Kelly's of the world or whatever. Right. And so knowing that whoever Trump puts up post Alito has got to be an actual insane person to meet the MAGA demands, which does. I'll just wanna kind of throw this out there cause it'll reattach to us later when we talk about the polling coming out of Maine and Texas. But does it throw into stark relief for you guys some of the partisan nature of just electing a Democrat, any Democrat in Maine. When you think about the fact that a Collins would likely be either a yes vote for whatever truly insane person comes up or a, a, a no vote that is conceived to be a no vote to keep her safe while they make sure they've got everybody else, they need to get this absolutely insane person through. Whereas if you had a Dem in that seat, that'd be a hard no. What do, what do we think about that?
- [10:56]
C
Can I just say the thing that makes it a little hard for me to do analysis in this vein is it sort of like assumes that you'd like get the name of the nominee and then everybody would go vote and then you would like, you know, you'd have either Susan Collins or Graham Platner in there to actually do the up or down here. Whereas I think if, if we, if it were to happen, if Alito were to retire, all of the energy would be to shove it through before there's any question about replacing a Susan Collins. Right? I mean, I think, I think that would be the, the thought process there of, and by the way, like, I mean you mentioned a minute ago, Sarah, that maybe that would sort of juice Republican turnout or Republican enthusiasm. I think that if Alito were to do it, he would maybe do it for purposes of court stability. But I am not necessarily convinced that having a big fight over one of these crazy people, which is not just what the MAGA base demands. But what Donald Trump has decided he needs, he is done with these Federalist Society judges that stab him periodically and is totally ready to send some real psycho up in there. And I just, I think there would be a big, messy fight. I think it would, would not just be Susan Collins. I think you'd risk losing guys like Bill Cassidy, guys like Thom Tillis and that. Like, you could have a giant actual problem on your hands. That is, that is not to any Republicans benefit electorally before guys like Platner or Talarico even arrive on the scene.
- [12:10]
A
Yeah, just two thoughts. I do. I mean, the case that you just made, I think is the strongest case for Platner, whether that be Supreme Court or something else that, like, to me it's less about a specific thing. That's just like, we don't really know what crazy shit Donald Trump's gonna do the last two years. We know he's gonna do a lot of crazy shit. There's not a ton of evidence that Susan Collins will be, will stand up to it. And, you know, unfortunately, I wish that that was not the way that we, you know, would prioritize the choice of senators, but we are in the year 2026, and that just, I think is something that voters should contemplate, even ones that have skepticism of Platner or hostility to him for that matter. But like, to me, the interesting part about this in the Alito timing is he obviously will want to do like an Eileen Cannon, right? I just think that that is what Trump will want to do, whether it's Eileen herself or some other facsimile of that. That's what Trump would want to do. Put somebody like that on the court. And the votes for that are already a little shaky, right, because of the way that he has angered these other senators with Cassidy in particular, Tillis and Cornyn. And so you wait till after, like, you wait till next year, like, even if they take a 51 seat majority, you know, it's that it's going to be a bit of a challenge. Like, Trump jammed through those. Like, one of the benefits of the first term, Trump with the judges is just like, I'm going to outsource this to the Federalist Society guys. They're going to put their people in. All of the senators already in bed with the Federalist Society. This is easy. Like, the Kavanaugh thing might have felt like it was kind of a fight because of the accusations, and the left did everything possible to try to make it a fight, but like, but all of Those nominations were fait accompli, Right? This time, if, like Trump tries to pick a Trump person, he needs as many votes as he can get and it's pretty dicey.
- [13:58]
B
I wrote this on a napkin earlier. I did this analysis, right. So if there are four R's against, right. He can lose three, but then he's got JD as the tiebreaker. But if there's four R's against in the Senate, against whoever he puts up, he's cooked. And right now you've got Cornyn, Murkowski, Tillis, Cassidy and Collins. Who are your people?
- [14:19]
A
Who. And McConnell, I would say also, I mean, he could be dead or not to be macabre, but just like McConnell seems very, very sick and also a deathbed. McConnell might decide that he doesn't want to be for a kook.
- [14:34]
B
This is a thumbs down McCain move, man.
- [14:36]
C
Is there any world in which John Fetterman on whatever bender he's been on crosses over for this specifically, do you think?
- [14:43]
A
Yes.
- [14:43]
B
Great point.
- [14:44]
A
For sure. Great point. Yeah. You might need five.
- [14:46]
B
You might need five. And this is where Collins gets jammed up on this. And this is why, this is why, Andrew, you're right about. They wouldn't be in their back. But like it would matter a great deal to her how she voted on this going into her election, number one. Number two, I just sort of meant it's clarifying sometimes to get pulled out of the specifics of Collins and Platner and to just be like, what are the cases where you're like any D that was in there versus her in there in terms of decisions like this, you suddenly are like, yeah, Susan Collins could get jammed up enough to vote for an Eileen Cannon and a Democrat, whoever the Democrat is in Maine. Like, if it was Graham Platner would be against this stuff. So anywho. Okay, last thing on SCOTUS before we go to the break, which is we what the other big thing we got was the trans sports ruling in which they said that basically they, they were, they were on the side of the states that said you had to be your biological sex to play.
- [15:55]
A
I want to lump this one in with the other big ruling which was from yesterday or today. I don't know, we were all traveling back from Aspen. So time. This is a little bit of a mystery for me right now, but right with the mail in ballots, you know, which is basically challenging the states that count mail in ballots after election day.
- [16:12]
B
If they're Watson versus rnc.
- [16:14]
A
Yeah, if they're postmarked by election day. But Received and counted after, do those ballots count? And to me, you know, for all the complaints I have about SCOTUS and their view on executive power and, you know, making Trump, you know, basically immune. Trump can sell pardons now, it seems like, without being, without that being a crime. So I've got some pretty severe disagreements with SCOTUS in the executive power category. Both of these cases kind of just fall into states rights category. I mean, like, you can get into the nerdy weeds about the rulings, but it's like if West Virginia decides they want to have to ban the two trans girls that want to, you know, swim in their meets in the state, then okay. And if California wants to allow them, then okay. And if California wants to count ballots that come in five days late and, you know, if West Virginia wants to disenfranchise people that mailed their ballot in, but because of the, you know, they live in rural West Virginia, and it didn't, it didn't make it, you know, to the, to the county in time for the election day, then that's their rule as well. And I don't, I don't see anything wrong with that. And I think that, that those rulings are kind of unobjectionable, really.
- [17:30]
C
The interesting one to see is going to be the one on the trans stuff specifically. We're going to get a very comparable case probably next term. That is the flip side of this. It's not, are states allowed to pass these rules keeping trans girls from playing in girls sports. It's going to be a case brought by biologically female athletes, basically saying that the whole federal government should bar trans participation in girls sports under Title 9. And we are probably going to see that at the Supreme Court next year. So you can kind of see this one as an appetiter to that other fight we're going to have later. I think it'll be more illuminating for where these judges fall on that one.
- [18:07]
B
Can I just ask you guys quickly on this as a political matter, is it better for Democrats to have this issue removed for them by the Supreme Court politically? So the Supreme Court makes the decision. It's off the table and basically it can. Republicans can no longer use it as the big wedge issue because it's more or less decided or. And dents kind of let that just go because they're not. This isn't like where they're going to make their big stand anymore or what do you think?
- [18:32]
A
I don't think it matters. I think the Dems need to help themselves on all this stuff. I think that, like, the transports issue is not a. Kamal Harris did not lose because of the swim meet where Riley Gaines finished and tied for fifth versus fifth. Okay. Like, I fundamentally, it's an issue that is. This is where I always object. People who, like Democrats focus on kitchen table issues was like the whole original conceit of kitchen table issues or issues that you discuss at the kitchen table. And people like to talk about transports. Like, it is something that people like to talk about. Right. So. So. But I think that Democrats can have different positions on that. I think that where Kamala got into trouble was this view that Democrats cared more about all that kind of stuff than they cared about things that mattered more broadly to the electorate. And so I don't know. I don't think that this issue in particular is the one that sunk them. And I think that frankly, there are ways to kind of mock the Republicans about it as well. And I think that there are some. And we're kind of getting to a consensus like the Olympics and like the international community is like, getting to a pretty clear consensus about what types of sports there should be different rules for. And like, where, you know, where. And the puberty, like, you know, and I think that that's just kind of working itself out. That's my view.
- [19:51]
C
Yeah. The thing that stands out as sort of the illustration of what you're talking about there, Tim, for me, is that we came out of the 2024 election where there was a certain conventional wisdom that Donald Trump had won hard on trans issues and that, you know, that there had just been this cultural shift, this big time cultural shift almost immediately. Who did you see? Like, the first person to really try to capitalize that and like, make that a big part of their own political brand was Nancy Mace in congress with her one woman crusade against Sarah McBride. And you had Sarah McBride over there basically staking out a case that was like, look, I'm in favor of trans rights and all these sorts of things, but I'm not extraordinarily loud about this stuff. This is not like the thing that defines me politically. It's the thing that defines you politically. You're the one who keeps making a giant deal out of it for me. And it just really fell flat from Nancy Mace because the thing.
- [20:38]
A
Winsome Sears, too. The Virginia gov race was another example.
- [20:41]
C
Yeah. For the most part, if you are the one who's bringing this topic up, there's like a burden of like, why are you bringing it up kind of on either side? Right. I mean, that's why it was effective against Kamala Harris. It was the stuff about trans operations for illegal immigrants and prison inmates and things like this. Like, well, why have you even spent time. What does it say about you that you are willing to spend political capital making stances on some of these issues to flatter some of these group suggests that you are just paying attention to stuff that's sort of far out of normal people's mainstream concerns. But that's not to say that Republicans can then turn around and make hay by them being the ones to focus really hard on these issues. It's only sort of in what it says about your priorities that it really ever becomes politically damaging for anybody.
- [21:25]
A
Nothing makes me want to turn to the next sponsor as much as thinking about Nancy Mace's position on trans issues. And that is our friends at Seoul. If you've been listening to the show for a while, you already know how I like Sol's out of Office THC Sparkling beverages. They're nice to have on a school night, or what I call podcast night now, where I want to hang out with a friend but don't want to have any concerns about a hangover the next day. Sol now is offering a new product as well. Mood Gummies. If you're anything like me, your day and night routines are not always routine. Whether it's doom scrolling, keeping up into the evening, that's me. Bad habits can throw you off your rhythm. One way to balance that out is with Soul's Mood Gummies. They've got precise dosing, clean ingredients, and formulations designed for predictable effects. You don't end up in Maureen Dow territory. If you're looking for a bright social and energizing buzz, you can go with the uplift gummy 3mg of Sativa THC. If you want to wind down the mellow Gummy delivers 3mg of indica THC, ideal for a cozy night and fully unplugging. Make today a good day and get yourself some Soul gummies. Right now, Seoul is offering our audience 30% off your entire order. Go to getsoul.com and use the code the next level. That's getsoul.com promo code the next level for 30% off.
- [22:44]
B
Yeah, and I'll just say if anybody's looking for a nice night, may I suggest 3mg and going on Britbox and watching Riot Women, which is so fun. Okay, I'm just saying, Andrew, have you
- [22:56]
A
ever tried that 3 milligram gummy and then just a Britbox Binge I am never.
- [23:02]
C
I've never done either of those things, actually. A three milligram gummy or the Britbox binge. Should I try them separately first and then combine them for like, an experimental, like, maximum data collection, or should I just jump right in with it all?
- [23:14]
B
I think you should jump right in. The 3mg are quite low, quite a low dose. You'll be okay. Okay. Also because I'm not jbl, I forgot to do a quick. While we're in ad mode, a quick thing. If you are a free member.
- [23:27]
A
You forgot to do a quick what? You forgot to do a quick, quick one. A quick thing.
- [23:31]
B
Quick thing. Promo. Promo.
- [23:33]
A
Okay.
- [23:34]
B
This is why I'm not usually the host. If you are a free member of the Bulwark and are thinking about an upgrade. This week the Bulwark is running our Fourth of July sale. A full year of membership for everything we offer on our website for$86.14 off. I endeavored as to how this number was agreed upon with our team.
- [23:57]
A
You don't know?
- [23:58]
B
I don't know.
- [23:58]
A
I would have maybe gone $76.
- [24:01]
B
I also thought perhaps there was something that would be a little more uniquely tied to the Fourth of July, but that's not what we did. We. It is $86. I think maybe 76 is too steep a discount.
- [24:13]
A
I don't know.
- [24:15]
B
It's a nice discount.
- [24:16]
A
Abortions for some, miniature American flags for others, and 14% off the bulwark plus for even others.
- [24:22]
B
That's right. And so, you know, we don't do these kinds of sales all that often. Go get it right now. Now's the time to upgrade. Guys, we need to talk about the DSA freakout that's happening after the New York's primaries last week. Last week, three Zoran Madani endorsed candidates won congressional primaries in New York City. We got Brad Lander, who beat Dan Goldman. We got assembly woman Claire Valdez, who won an open seat. And we've got Daria Lisa Avila. Chevrolet. Chevalier.
- [24:50]
A
Chevalier.
- [24:51]
B
Chevalier. We're just gonna go with DAC because I did my best, but I still didn't hit it. She's got some, you know, pretty intense opinions about a whole bunch of things. Very sort of commie adjacent. K File has a big roundup of that if you guys want to go listen to them.
- [25:09]
A
What do you think, Edgar? I know what my opinion is. I want to know what Edgar's opinion is.
- [25:13]
C
Which. Which bit of my opinion? I don't like it. It's bad. I wouldn't.
- [25:16]
A
Yes, Ascendancy, I think it's over torqued a little.
- [25:20]
C
I think like, you know, what, what they're going to do, what Democratic primary voters are going to do in New York City, especially off of the endorsement of this extremely popular mayor whose popularity transcends his own ideological commitments. I mean, I think it's kind of a petri dish designed to turf up some candidates like this. And I would like to see similar, I guess like to see is the wrong. Is the wrong way to put it. I would, I would, I would need to see this sort of thing happening in, you know, less predictable areas before I am ready to like declare the Democratic Party like this being the future of it, I guess I would say.
- [25:57]
A
Well, Andrew, I do think it's probably going to expand. We're taping this Tuesday afternoon, so by the time some people listen to us on Wednesday, we'll know what happened. In Colorado, I kind of expect the DSA candidate to win at least one of the races there. And we'll see In Denver, Diana DeGette has been a congresswoman representative representing Denver since I was in short pants. I mean, like she's, I was kind of surprised that she was still there when this race started, to be honest. And so she has a DSA challenger, Hickenlooper does in the Senate race. Bennett has kind of more of a traditional left candidate challenging him in the governor's race. So we'll kind of see how that shakes out. I expect that we'll see at least if I was just going to put my money on it would be to get losing. And so you'll see some expansion. I think that will expand the freak out that Sarah was referencing among kind of the D.C. establishment class. And I think that the more that the DC establishment class freaks out, the more it empowers the left because that's exactly what they want, is for those people to freak out. And so I just, I don't know. I talked about this a little bit with David French today, but I think that everybody kind of learned the wrong lessons from the Tea Party. And I feel like there's a lot of Democratic establishment people who are like, you know, what was it that John Boehner did back in 2010? I should do the exact same thing because that really worked out well. And it's like, you know, look, I think that a lot of people, there are, there are some ideological DSA types within the party. I'm not what, I don't know what that number is. Maybe it's 10, maybe it's 20. But there's that. Then there's a lot of other people that just look at the Democrats, and they're Democratic voters, and they say, you know what? We tried it your way, and Donald Trump got elected again. And I'd like to try it a different way, because I am fucking pissed that Donald Trump got elected again. And in response to that, right now, we have one group of people that is offering a coherent other way, and that is the populist left. And I think as long as that's the case, they're gonna have some success in the meantime. And I think that, you know, again, it is true that there's some young voters who are more, you know, younger, are more interested in socialism than us millennials were when we were young. So there is something to monitor there. But I think in the grand scheme of things, what is happening is that the populist left is offering a new path forward. And I think that the folks in the center or on the establishment of the Democratic Party would be better served to also offer a fresh path forward and a new strategy for fighting Trump and a commitment to fighting Trump and a commitment to caring about people's economic concerns. And that would be a better use of their time than, like, throwing spitballs at the left, because I think the more the spitballs they throw at them, the more that they're going to empower the tiger. We just. I just. I lived this, so that's. That's my 2 cents on all of this. But I. You know, I think that one of my other takes on Darieliza, who seems awful to me, is that I would like us to expand the House by a lot. I think it'd be great. I think the House should have, like, five Darielises, and we should have, like, seven Thomas Massey's. And, you know, we should have some elder millennial homosexuals who are, you know, who have, like, mixed different types of views, like liberal social views and more conservative economic views. Like, you know what I mean? Like, we should have some Jared Polis's like, Like, I don't. It is not that big of a deal for there to be three crazy people in Congress. And so I think that at some level, you know, that part of it gets a little bit overblown. Congress, the House of Representatives is where crazy people should be. I want lots of flavors of crazy in the House, and I think that would serve us. You know, it's a big country. So that's my contrarian take on Darieliza.
- [29:57]
B
Yeah, I have. I wouldn't go quite as far as that. But I would remark that we have seen, you know, aoc, Cori, Bush, Jamal Bowman, like we have had cycles like this. And I also think, I, I just want to say for the record, and I've been talking about this in other formats, I do think that DSA panic is, is overblown. And I also think that the Tea Party, remember, who do we nominate? Who did Republicans nominate during the Tea
- [30:23]
A
party was in 2010, said to be 2012. Andrew was seven. Do you remember that guy? Andrew?
- [30:28]
C
Yeah, he was some Mormon fellow.
- [30:31]
A
I think he was Mitt Romney.
- [30:33]
B
He was in the midst of, in the wake of the Tea Party, the Republicans nominated the, the, the not at all radical Mitt Romney. And so I, I think that, I think that we shouldn't overread it for, for the entire country. I also think we are in the middle. If you look at the people that are doing well right now, I think that it has a little bit less to do with whether or not they are socialists and a lot more to do with whether or not they are good communicators. And so I think we are seeing much more of a communications shift here than we are just sort of an ideological one. Because the ideological. To me, what is happening very clearly is you've got both the disappointment with the establishment coupled with affordability as a main issue, like a top of mind issue. And some of these candidates are talking about this more than their more centrist counterparts, which is a problem because people are locked in on affordability right now. And obviously the Iran war has put Israel front and center, which is helping some of these other candidates do. And then the third thing is Mamdani is popular at the moment. Use some of his capital. Tim mentioned that on stage and it's really true. So. And you know what? Instead of freaking out, instead of freaking out, how about, how about more of the centrist candidates do the work of being good communicators and talking about affordability and fighting, pushing against Trump.
- [31:53]
A
Let's talk about Denver for a second. So we'll see what the results are tonight. Who are the three? So it's me that, you know, I'm going to talk about. I want to talk about the establishment people that are being put up in Colorado right now. Okay. And it's like, all right, so you've all this bedwetting of like, oh, there might be a socialist barista that represents Denver. And it's like, okay, well who'd you put up against her? Diana DeGette, who as mentioned was literally the Representative of Denver. Okay. Like, she has been there forever. There are two senators, John Hickenlooper and Michael Bennett. Neither of them are knocking anybody's socks off with their communication styles. Neither of them you can think of as having a good moment in pushing back on Trump over the past 10 years, can you? I can't. I remember Michael Bennett getting mad at a couple Senate hearings. I can't remember Hickenlooper doing anything, you know, and so it's like, okay, now you have Hickenlooper running up. He was mayor of Denver when I was in middle school. Like, so these people have been there forever. Michael Bennett ran the public schools of Denver when I was in middle school. And then he went to the Senate. And then he's like, I'm bored in the Senate. I haven't done anything to stop Donald Trump. I want to come back and run Colorado now. And so, like, you can understand, I think, why some Democrats in Denver and in the rest of Colorado look at these candidates and are like, I don't think that this is what the moment is calling for. And Denver and Colorado also, by the way, has some dynamic young House members who are in the center. Jason Crow is like, I think a real moderate. Jonah Goose, I think is kind of a middle of the Democratic Party guy, but is the younger guy from Boulder, black guy, and both here. He's been really good on oversight in the House. Nagus has. And so it's like, okay, imagine what this picture would look like if instead of Bennett and to get and Hickenlooper, it was Negus and Crow and somebody from the state legislature that like, was his turn, it was to be in fucking Congress because Diana to get retired like she should have, and they were running against three barista socialists. I think the results would probably be different. I don't know, but who knows? I'm just saying. So, like, I think that, like, the context of all this is important and if the Democratic establishment is worried about this, they should be, like, looking in the mirror rather than like looking down the street like, they should be doing something different.
- [34:02]
B
I would say my prediction, because we did, we went deep on Colorado.
- [34:08]
A
I listened to your focus group this week.
- [34:09]
B
Did you listen to it? Kyle Clark should be a star. Kyle Clark, if you're listening again, should come work for us. You are excellent. You were, you were terrific. I'll just make job offers on the pods. But he was, he was outstanding. My prediction is that to get and Bennett probably both lose. I think Hickenlooper hangs on, but I do, I think the other two might be going down. And the person who's challenging Bennett, by the way, isn't a DSA type. It's just that we're in an anti incumbent mood right now as a country and globally. It's part of what took down Donald or, sorry, took down Joe Biden. Okay, moving on to Tom Keene. Tom Keene. It was a Congress.
- [34:52]
A
Is that Keene or Kane?
- [34:53]
B
Nope, it's Kane. It's Kane.
- [34:55]
A
Producer Candy Cane.
- [34:56]
B
Yeah, pronounced spelled Keen, but it is pronounced Keen or. Sorry, Just reset that.
- [35:04]
A
Stop resetting it. It's funny, it's part of the charm. Keep going, keep going.
- [35:09]
B
Oh, my God. Fine. So he just returned to Congress after not voting for three months. He hadn't told anyone why, but he had this to say on the House floor.
- [35:17]
A
Several months ago, due to health concerns,
- [35:20]
C
I entered the hospital for some testing. I did not believe that this would
- [35:25]
A
result in a long term stay.
- [35:27]
C
I was given the diagnosis of depression.
- [35:30]
A
Now, when people hear the word depression,
- [35:33]
C
many people think simply feel it means feeling sad. But depression is so much more than that. It is physical, it is emotional. And until you experience it yourself, it is difficult to fully understand how, how
- [35:48]
A
powerful this illness can be. I'll go ahead and be the dick here. I don't know where you guys will land, but I don't. I think at the beginning of the remarks, he talks about how he's a private person. Like, you're in, you're in Congress, like, I'm sorry, you ran for the House of Representatives. You're allowed to be a private person if you want to be in private life, but you're in public life. And I don't. You can't disappear for three months and not vote and have your staff lie to people about where you are because you have some mysterious type of depression. I'm sorry. If you have such severe depression that you have to disappear for three months to take care of it, you should resign Congress and go take care of your depression. And he comes from a wealthy family and wealthy background. He'd have plenty of opportunities if he wanted to in the private sector. And he could do whatever he want once he got his mind right or his health right. So. So I don't mean to be insensitive to people that have serious depression or whatever, but this is crazy. And this is crazy. And one thing, if it's like, this is a manageable type of depression where I have to go into therapy for periods of time and we're going to plan it out and I'm Going to work with my staff. I'm going to tell people where I've been. But you can't be like, oh, I'm going to be transparent now and still not really say where you were. And are we sure that it can't happen again?
- [37:08]
C
I don't know.
- [37:08]
A
I think the voters will probably take care of this in his district in November. But, you know, I mean, pretty, pretty bad.
- [37:16]
C
I think I basically agree with all of that. I mean, the one element that I would maybe add is this does seem to be the kind of story that just on sort of like a human or like, on a psychological level, it seems plausible. It kind of snuck up on him, right? He, like, goes into the hospital, he's like, dealing with what he kind of talked about, like just sort of full body, like collapse. In a lot of ways, that ultimately comes down to this diagnosis of depression. And he thinks he's going to be gone just a couple days maybe. And then that strings out a little longer. And strings out a little longer. And strings out a little longer. And you know, for, for a guy of his age or Republican of his age, you can easily imagine that there's a certain amount of, like, personal shame that kind of comes along with this that, you know, we wouldn't necessarily have if we were diagnosed with something like this. And it just, it sort of spitballs. And he's, he's, you know, not doing so well emotionally, obviously. That's the whole point. He's pushing off the decisions, pushing off decisions, not really thinking about what to do. And it just ends up in this basically indefensible and really unfortunate situation that you describe. But where, where you can easily say this was the wrong move, he handled this badly. But you, at least from where I'm sitting, it's not. Not that hard to figure out.
- [38:21]
A
A little presumptuous, though. And his dad was the chair of the 911 Commission. Like, it's not like this. I don't know, like, to me this sounds like this feels like a little nepo, Chuck, a little nepotism. Like somebody that feels like that they don't have. They don't have an obligation to others because they are in a patrician class that I can go take care of this stuff in private and it's none of your business, and I'm private. It feels a little bit from. From the wrong era, don't you think?
- [38:47]
C
If he had been gone a couple days and come right back, like, he wouldn't have needed to be like, hey, everybody, just by the way, I'M clinically depressed. Like. Sure, that's. That's all I'm saying.
- [38:55]
A
Yeah, but he wasn't, he was gone for a quarter of the year.
- [38:59]
C
Well, that's what I, that's what I think. Like, I mean, I just think it ballooned while he's inside of it in a way that he couldn't really find a good off ramp for. And it led to all of this embarrassment and this giant political scandal and obviously it went on way too long. All I'm saying is I understand how you could find yourself like record scratch. That's me. I bet you're wondering how I ended up in this situation. I think it's not that insane that like an otherwise respectable and sort of like public minded person might land in this situation.
- [39:27]
A
So the former Navy helicopter pilot Rebecca Bennett is opposing him in the election this year and she seems tough. What's that district like the New Jersey 7?
- [39:39]
B
I was going to ask you guys, but we're kind of running along, but I guess I would just throw out. I wonder if people felt that way, you know, with Fetterman, remember when, because this was maybe one of the more recent times we've had to have a conversation about a public official who's now told us who both has like health concerns, but also mental health concerns. Like he was very open about sort of his post stroke battles with depression. And do we think that being open about those things and taking sort of ownership of them is a good thing? Or. Tim, do you feel like based on what you said, that if somebody does that, that that calls into question their ability to serve?
- [40:18]
A
No, it depends what we're talking about. I mean, like, these are two situations where I think in both cases, yes, it calls into question your ability to serve if you have to be in a remote secret location for three months. Or in the case of Fetterman where you have a lot of staff that are like really concerned about your mental health and you're lashing out at people personally. Or there was another case, gosh, oh man, I don't want to run in the line somebody. But there was another politician where this was the case recently that was a Democrat that was like less pronounced than Fetterman where the candidate was lashing out at staff and going through these bouts of mental health issues that were sprouting up privately and, and then they decided to resign. I'm blanking on who it was, but it's like, I think it's good to talk about mental health issues. Richie Torres has had mental health issues, has talked about it, how important it is, take care of mental health and he's had hospitalization over it. That's nothing to be ashamed about. But it's like, I mean, there are certain things that are not compatible with being in public office. And that doesn't mean that there's anything particularly that that doesn't make you a bad person. It's just like, okay, well if you have a mental health issue that you can manage and also be in public life and manage a staff and make these sorts of decisions that impact everybody, then great. But like, if you need to go into hiding for three months, then you should probably find a replacement.
- [41:42]
C
Ultimately, it's not up to like any of us specifically, whether this or that or the other medical condition or mental thing or whatever is disqualifying. Right. That's up to the voters of that district. Which is why the transparency thing is so important. Like you were saying before Tim, and that was the real like crime here, if anything was not just that, like he was diagnosed with depression and had to deal with that, but the fact that he went to ground and kept everybody guessing for months and months. I think that is more likely to hurt him politically in the long run. And that is probably for like, that's probably to the good.
- [42:13]
B
Yeah. Speaking of other personal things for politicians, last week we learned via a substack post that Pete Buttigieg had had Child Protective services called on him because he got like swatted. I don't even know what you would call this exactly, but like a false. A person registered a false claim against him, a false allegation that concerned his four year old twins. They said that there was going to be a forensic interview arranged for the children the following day, which means Child Protective service both removed Pete said he couldn't be with his kids, then pulled the kids in and made them sit with strangers for like an interview about their dad had. And like basically when he, Pete, finally got questioned, it was easily disprovable that all of the things this person had alleged were wrong. And so I don't know this. When I read this, it was, it was so infuriating.
- [43:12]
A
Go off. I already got. I was live on Ms. When this thing dropped. So I had to rant about it on Ms. I've already done it on the podcast and it makes me. I'm starting to sweat again. I'm getting mad about it. So I want to Sarah, I want to hear Sarah's.
- [43:23]
B
So I don't know Andrew. I'll be interested in how Andrew feels, but I Do think that for both Tim and I, who are gay parents with children, and maybe it hits harder for dads because I do think that people would probably. I'm not sure they would. They would get away with this with moms the same way. But I do know the idea of being separated from your children and then having your young children taken into a place where you can't. You're right. Actually, I am gonna get all worked up. I'm gonna. I'm gonna cry about it. It's like, then taking your kids and making them, like, face questions about you just because somebody, some rando somewhere who doesn't like you politically was able to register a charge. Like, I don't know. I was so enraged on his behalf, but. But also just for that, this is where politics is going. Like the idea that as a public servant, right, what you end up signing up for is people being able to get in between you and your kids for no reason. Well, I mean, obviously it's wrong. Obviously. I think it's just. It's. It's really hard to attract good people into public service when this is what they're going to be faced with. Like, we're. We're sort of already sadly getting a little bit used to, like, the fake pizza delivery and the swatting and all this horrible stuff that comes with it. But like. Like, when it comes to your. Not just these are little kids, they've got little kids. And it makes me mad every time somebody comes for Pete in this way where like, they AI. Whatever. I actually. I'm not going to repeat all the. The horrible smears people make against it, but this was like a step that was so far away from sort of decency. And you're like. It was one of those things where you're like, wait, does our country operate like this? Is this what Child Protective Services does? Like that. The ability for the. The way that they couldn't first talked. Pete didn't even know what they weren't telling him. They wouldn't give him the information. Like, I don't know. That is. That is too awful to a human being and like, our laws shouldn't work this way.
- [45:27]
C
Yeah.
- [45:27]
A
Yeah.
- [45:27]
C
I mean, I haven't really talked about or written about this story at all. I mean, it's just such an unspeakable, unspeakable story along the. I don't need to reiterate the things you guys have said. My oldest kid is four. I just cannot. I cannot imagine that layer of it. There's a tension here because on the One hand, it is good to have a legal regime that's in place to protect kids. And I do want to hesitate to draw any, like, two sweeping conclusions about, like, what it says about America that like, one person would do this sort of thing. I mean, there are just. There are always going to be people who do horrible things. Politicians get shot at. You know, unspeakable crimes are committed against people all the time. It's awful. It's awful. It's awful. It should not be allowed to happen. The thing that to me is so particularly unsettling and horrible about this story is just how easy it was for some bad actor to weaponize this system, this system that's supposed to exist for good reasons, and that maybe it has come to exist in this way, even with this, like, sort of unspeakably low burden of proof for good reasons. I don't know how you fix that system. I don't think you want to necessarily turn it back so far that actual, you know, abusers start to slip through the cracks. But I think one thing that you could in theory do is ratchet up the consequence for insane false allegation. That seems like a reasonable thing that we could talk about as a policy response. Because that is just like, I can't. I just. I don't. I don't know what to say about it. It's so evil.
- [47:05]
B
For me, when I was saying about, like, what America, what I did mean was the system. Not that like, just a person can do this. Like, that is part of it is you always think, like, how could a human being do this to another human being? Because it was obviously fabricated. But I do mean. I do mean the system. And to me, Andrew, can I just. This seems like one of those, like, common sense ones. Like, do you need to adjust on policy or do you need to be like, hey, this guy is a high, highly public figure. We should tread carefully here. And like, the chances of it being for, like, political reasons are very high. And so we have to treat it maybe differently than just, this is our. This is how we do things.
- [47:47]
A
This is. This is how I feel about this stuff. And I think sometimes it's benefits to have outsiders look at it. Maybe there can be a review of this because since I was happening live on TV when this happened and I. They brought in experts on tv and then I had people reach out to me and they're like, well, this is kind of how the CPS system works. And it's like, well, then we should probably change it. I understand that you want to create a blanket rule about how to handle things because you don't want to leave everything up to judgment. But I don't know, maybe we can create a checklist that it's like if the person making the accusation is anonymous and they don't live in the same person's state and they don't, you know, then, then like, you should do a little bit more recon before invading the person's house and sending jackbooted thugs to interview their fucking kids. You know what I mean? Like, I don't know. The state should not just have blanket carte blanche on this sort of stuff. And it's where my libertarianism and civil libertarianism comes in. And the only things that madden me about it, maybe there's one person that have done it, I haven't seen it, but, you know, there was a big parents rights movement in this country to come after the gays, you know, with Moms for Liberty, et cetera. They're like, they want to have the liberty to have their kids not be exposed to gay Penguin books in school. And whatever you think about that view, like, you, if there was any consistency there, you would think that you would have the freedom to be able to parent your children without the government, the state coming there to separate you from them for 12 hours because, because there was a false accusation against you. So I just, and the whole thing to me is like extremely maddening. And I do agree that there should be punishments for the people that do this. And I don't, I'm not like holding my breath that the DOJ is going to be like, really spend a lot of resources on that.
- [49:27]
B
Well, I just, I, I don't know that I'm sure they were not jackbooted thugs who interviewed the kids. But I will say, as a parent,
- [49:34]
A
any agent of the state I consider to be a jackbooted thug. Anybody who comes into my home and tells me it separates me from my child as the state, I'm sorry, you might be nice about it, but that's, that's, that's. You might be wearing sensible shoes. You might be wearing sensible shoes and you might be sweet about it and you might be. The questions might not have been that hard, but fudge, you get the fuck out of my house.
- [49:54]
B
That's right. I, that is sort of where I was going was just like, no matter how nice, like the, the extent to which, if just in case somebody is thinking like, wow, it doesn't seem so bad, these people just like came in and questioned like, you've got A four year old like these, you think about their formative experiences all the time. And you think about somebody like putting like the brain burn on your kid that like they could be separated from you or that they can be asked questions about you. Like that is just. There's a trauma to that for all sides.
- [50:25]
A
I don't really even love. And my understanding, I've come to not to not care about this because it seems like you guys can tell me, I guess Andrew, you could tell me you're a straight man with children. Do you have clear and TSA pre. Do you do that? You get there with your children and the TSA person asks the kid who is this?
- [50:43]
C
I have too many kids. I almost never fly with them. So I actually, I do not have tsa.
- [50:48]
A
I don't even like that. I don't even really like that. Makes me feel like okay, wait, does
- [50:54]
B
that happen to you?
- [50:55]
A
Yeah, the tsa the clear. My understanding is that it happens to other people too. I don't know that it's not just a race and gender thing. But I don't love it. You know when they're looking at my kid and saying like who is this to you going through, I assume it's to protect against child trafficking. And I understand all this but I don't know again sometimes because it's like anything else, you know, that could be a well intentioned policy that creates to me I think kind of some unnecessary stress on the kid. Like I bought the ticket, I'm here with the kid. If the kid was stolen then wouldn't they be in this? Couldn't you just run the system on the fly? Anyway, we're getting far afield here.
- [51:32]
B
But yeah, let's just, we'll turn the page. But I'm sorry that that happens. Actually that's not happened, it's just what it is.
- [51:37]
A
That's fine.
- [51:38]
B
Okay. The last thing on the list before we have a good show long show is the New York Times Santa polling roundup that we just got from both Maine and Texas. Maine. In Maine Graham Platner's lead on Susan Collins is 49 to 47%. So that's only two points. Most interesting thing about this was that white college educated voters were 6831 Platner but white non college were 5936 Collins which I think for like the oyster man, you know, working class appeal of the vice signaling etc it doesn't seem to be helping with white non college voters. And then in Texas, Talarico and Paxton are tied at 47% Texas Hispanics went from. They were at 5049 for Trump in 2024 per the AP vote cast and now it is 6129 for Talarico. That would be a 33% swing to the left for Hispanics in Texas. What do we, what do we think, what do we think about both these polls?
- [52:52]
A
I just, on the non college whites thing, I just, I don't know what the answer is for the Democrats but they should be trying a lot of different things to try to figure it out. There was an old TN from like two months ago. Somebody was trying to throw in my face after this poll came out because I had said on there they like pulled a clip and I'd said like basically the Democrats can't have a functional majority without non college whites because of the makeup of the country and they cannot lose at Assad like numbers when it comes to non college whites. They need to come up with a new plan. And I think I said something to the effect of I don't know if Graham Platner is the magic beans for that, but it's worth a try. I know that Janet Mills is not not. And it seems like he's not the magic beans either. So I don't know. But Talarico numbers are even worse than Platners among non college whites. I mean I think that the non college whites in Texas are a little different than the non college whites in Maine, but he's getting absolutely slaughtered and is making up for that with Hispanic vote as you just laid out. So I don't, I think it's still a big hill to climb for Talarico. It's great to be tied 47. 47. 47 is a long way from 50 though. We've seen this before among Democrats in these red states. It's kind of hard to get that last push to get over the edge. But you know, kind of we'll see Paxton simultaneously. It was like videotaping like canoodling with his latest mistress this weekend instead of campaigning. So he's making it as easy as possible until a RICO to try to make inroads. But I just, it's a big issue for Dems right now and maybe there
- [54:22]
C
are no magic beans. Right? I mean like it is not. It is completely possible that there is zero lever that Democrats could pull right now to like get white non college educated voters to redefect back to them en masse. I mean this, this migration from the Democrats to the Republicans was decades in the making. It had, it was Long, long, long, long, long, slow trend in that direction where, where you had a lot of people whose minds were slowly changing over time, slowly getting more, you know, caught up in all this culture war grievance stuff, you know, know, slowly getting more alienated from the Democratic Party while still pulling the lever for Democrats. And then Donald Trump comes along and suddenly, you know, it's like first gradually, then all at once and you see the movement electorally. But like, that is not to say that you can immediately get that back in some cases, apparently you can. The, the, it was a different story for Southern Hispanics who, you know, kind of came along on, well, maybe Donald Trump's stuff on the border is not so bad and have since hardcore recoiled from that. But like, maybe the winning play for Democrats is something that starts to bear fruit not in 20 or even 2028, but like in 10 years. And that, that's all, that's the best they can hope for. And like, I can see a bad possibility being that they just sort of careen from strategy to strategy on kind of a two year rolling cycle. Well, that didn't work for getting back, you know, uneducated white people. Let's try something completely different. That didn't work. Let's try something completely different. That didn't work. Let's try something completely different and just never coalesce around anything that actually has any sort of long term appeal to them. I actually do think that, that, you know, we are perhaps too quick around here to say like the stuff Biden was trying back when he was like, you know, doing investments in rural communities and stuff, that, that didn't work because Trump got reelected anyway. Like, I just, maybe there was never a magic bullet and that is still the strategy that would pay the best dividends long term.
- [56:13]
B
I don't know, can I just say, I, for the Maine, Texas, I was, I was interested in the fact that they pulled these two states together because it's starting to really look like these, the candidates of Talarico and Platner and then Collins and Paxton, they end up being mirror images to one another. Right? Because on the Dem side in Maine, you've got a person with character problems that is causing hesitancy out of not most, but enough. Like when you're on these margins. But it's a, but it's a blue state, right? You're talking about a blue state of Maine. But Collins is tough to beat, but Platner's relative weaknesses are causing him some problems. Similarly over in Texas, which is a red state Paxton's scandals and weaknesses. Now, I'm not going to compare the two. So before everybody yells at me in the comments, I'm not saying they're the same, but these are mirror images in terms of you've got real liabilities from and so it shouldn't be as close.
- [57:15]
A
It's funny, you see the online partisans are like, you know, what we really need is somebody who just puts his finger in the eye of the other side and says, and there's a big middle finger, as Rich Lowry said, the other side. And like that's what voters want. We need to stop with the pearl clutching. It was J.D. what did J.D. say to Ross D. We're trying to put elite preferences on the working class by pretending like work class people don't, you know, don't use coarse language. It's kind of like, I don't know, you just look at the poll numbers. It's like it doesn't seem like those issues are benefiting Ken Paxton or Graham Plattner, Andy. Like they are both the ones that are underperforming and the sweet choir boy is the one who's overperforming in Texas. And I think that's counter the Twitter conventional wisdom. I got a fun fact for you. Fun depressing fact for you on the sub on the cross tabs in Texas. You ready for it?
- [58:07]
B
Yeah.
- [58:08]
A
Okay, we're gonna go through the main metros. Dallas, Fort Worth, Talarico 47, Paxton 46, Houston, Talarico 52, Paxton 42, San Antonio and South Texas, Rio Grande Valley, Telarico 57, Paxton 37, Austin, Talarico 62, Paxton 31, Rest of Texas, 31, Paxton 62. Isn't that crazy? Paxton is losing every metro in Texas, but just slaughtering Talarico in Midland and East Texas and that still might, might be enough.
- [58:51]
B
Yeah, it's going to be really close. I wish. Jasmine Crockett. I said this at the show, but I feel strongly about this. One of the things when Democrats ask for different kinds of they're thinking about messaging or whatever. One of my favorite things to tell them is that if you want to build a community of voters, you need to be a community like a, like the. Part of the reason Democrats have a hard time pulling a coalition together is that Democrats generally don't seem to like each other much and they don't like, go out together and present a united front. And I would very much like Jasmine Crockett to help tell Rico out and show up for him as opposed to, you know, anything she can do to help him, not just with black voters, but with Democrats in general, I think would be. Would be very helpful. The other thing that was notable to me is that they did have one of these questions in there. The polls had a question about how well the description has good character applies to these candidates. I'm quite interested in the character question overall, just because it was beaten into us as young conservatives. That character is destiny. And then it was the first thing everybody decided to forget the second Donald Trump showed up. And so, you know, in a book, I have a. I have a chapter called.
- [60:08]
A
What book are you talking about?
- [60:10]
B
The one that I wrote, how to
- [60:11]
A
keep your infant one vote at a time.
- [60:12]
B
Yes, my vote. Character doesn't count.
- [60:15]
A
Tyler said, by the way. I'm sorry. Well, you're going to do the character facts, but can we. I just want to pause on this. Tyler said that it felt mean when I was making the book joke to you at the Aspen Ideas Festival, the morning joke where I pretend like you're talking about your book too much, and then you say that I didn't want you to write a book. And he said he felt like. It seemed like there was real tension at the Bulwark behind the scenes over the book. And I just want to say that is not the case. There's no real tension over the book. I'm so happy for Sarah and her book. I do, you know, if I had my preference, you know, she would have been doing more podcasting than book writing. But that's okay. That's. You know, I mean, I don't get to tell Sarah what to do in her life. She doesn't give. I'm sure that there are things about my life that she would tell me that she would like me to do differently. And, you know, that's part of friendship, you know, that's part of being a good partner, you know, in business and in life, you know, is that you support each other even when they go down a path, you know, that doesn't benefit you as much as you hope.
- [61:14]
B
Yeah, it might be this. It might be this reason that people are picking up on the fact that you absolutely told me not to write the book and whatever.
- [61:22]
A
That's okay. But that's fine. That's all. Now, we can joke about that, though. The point is that it's something that did really happen. Sarah did it anyway, and it's fine now. But we are gonna still tease each other about that. That's all. It's like when she's number one and I was number two in The Times list. You said I shouldn't write a book. Look at me now, number one, that is coming. And that's all fine. It's all love. That's all I'm saying. There's no. No hidden tension. Just want to let everybody know.
- [61:46]
B
That's right. No hidden tension. Because we do it all right here for you guys to see.
- [61:50]
A
This is.
- [61:51]
B
That's interesting.
- [61:52]
A
Anyway, character mattering.
- [61:53]
B
Do you want to know who ranked highest of the four candidates in has good character? We got Tal Rito, we got Paxton, we got Platinum, we got Collins. Who ranked the highest?
- [62:04]
C
50 is easy, right?
- [62:06]
A
Yeah. I don't think that you would be asking us this if it wasn't Susan Collins. So I'm going to say. I mean, I don't think that the people of Texas are so. So debased that they would say that Ken Paxton has good character. So I think it's got to be Collins.
- [62:19]
B
It is Collins. So Collins has 65% say very or somewhat. Well, that description matches her for has good character. Platner's at 44%, Paxton's at 39%, and Talarico is at 57%. Now, here's what's interesting to me. Susan Collins has that people think she personally is of high character. But that doesn't mesh with the number of people in Maine who also in the survey said. Said they want Democrats to take over the Senate. Right. So there's like a. There's a real percentage of people in Maine who think that Susan Collins is of superior character compared just in general and in both.
- [63:09]
A
In both states, people that think that the person that they are voting for has bad character.
- [63:15]
B
That's right.
- [63:16]
A
The person that they're voting against has good character.
- [63:18]
B
Good character. That's exactly right.
- [63:19]
A
That's an interesting person.
- [63:20]
C
I do sort of wonder what that adds up to, like, psychologically for the person. Like, are they actually, in their mind, making this assessment that that good character is a flaw politically, or is it more like. Is it more like, I'm going to vote for this person, but, like, I'm making this sort of mental concession to the other person that, like, I don't think they're a moral monster or anything like that?
- [63:40]
B
I think that's right. I think that, yeah, I think it's. It's that. That they actually see. And because I. I wrestled with this with Jeff Flake on stage at Aspen, where maybe Susan Collins doesn't have as much. She certainly doesn't have as much, like, direct character problems as Graham Platner.
- [63:58]
A
I Will say Susan Collins is very old and it seems. I do, I do think it's true that she did cheat, that her relationship. There was a cheating. I don't, I don't have. It's like deep in the archives, like you have to go on to stone tablets to find the news about this. I don't have. I forget if it was her husband was cheating on their first wife. Wife or Susan when she was a staffer. This is, this is true. Like there was a cheating scan, like mini scandal related to Susan Collins at the beginning of her career. Just nobody remembers anymore. So it's kind of the benefit of history.
- [64:31]
C
Never heard anything about that.
- [64:33]
B
Can I offer a different assessment of character?
- [64:36]
A
Well, that wasn't an assessment. I was just.
- [64:37]
B
No, I know. Okay, well, that's. So my thought, though, is character also means did you stand up to Donald Trump when he tried to, to like take over the United States and turn it into an authoritarian government? Right. To me, that is quite a sign of. So I think that people have like, well, Susan Collins is like a personally, like a nice lady. And I'm not sure that that to me is the same thing as the depth of character that I am looking for. And I think so. I think there's a lot of ways that people could think about this. But yes, to me, it was quite interesting that I think there are. There's a big cross section of people who say this person is of low character, but I'm still voting for them because of the higher purpose of whether it's partisanship or because then I want them to do these things that I think are of higher order concerns than their own personal behavior, which I just thought was interesting.
- [65:32]
A
I agree with that assessment. I do just want to get it right. Her first husband, Thomas Daffron, or her husband, excuse me, no accusation that she did anything wrong, but her husband, Thomas Daffron had been married. There's some. The timeline. There's some questions about the timeline. I think his wife was sick. So anyway, whatever. I don't know any details. Just saying that time. The lesson here is that time heals, you know, and so the longer that you stay in public life and hold on to power with a death grip, the more people will begin to forget your past indiscretions. This happened for Ted Kennedy, so it's a bipartisan.
- [66:14]
C
This was, by the way, one of the reasons why the latest allegations against Graham Platner related to women were. Some of us were like, hey, maybe these are worse than the Reddit stuff or the tattoo stuff because it was last couple years stuff. It was not long ago and the meathead passed. But now we're even getting a little couple months removed from those allegations. So who the heck knows? Who the heck knows how anybody going to process this stuff?
- [66:37]
B
Well, we're going to keep on that because we are now out of the polling. We are now polling the general electorate in head to heads, which I think is just an easier thing to look at than when we were just looking at the primary polling in terms of where things are headed. Because the question is is who's going to pick up these swing voters. Okay, guys, good show. Long show. Are there any other topics that I have missed that you desperately need?
- [67:00]
A
I did want to talk about Scott Wiener getting. Getting non queered by a person at a queer. But it's okay, we don't have to do it. I'm gonna do it tomorrow on the pod. I've got a guest to do it on Wednesday's daily pod. And so I just wanted to let you know, Sarah, as far as I'm concerned, you're still a queer. Oh, thanks. I'm not going to remove you from queerness just because you have issues that I disagree with politically.
- [67:26]
B
That's. I appreciate that. I didn't know it was on the table.
- [67:29]
A
Andrew, you're not a queer. Congratulations.
- [67:32]
C
That's what people keep telling me.
- [67:34]
B
Yeah, that's what my wife keeps saying. Andrew, you're the best. Thanks for sitting in for jvl. Tim, you're also the best. Love you guys. And thanks to all of you for listening to another episode of the Next Level. We'll see you next week.
- [67:50]
A
Good luck, America.
- [67:52]
B
Yeah, good luck, America. That's how we get out of this. Bye.