A Mamdani Strategist’s Advice for Democrats in the 2026 Midterms

Summary

---

The Political Scene | The New Yorker

Episode: "A Mamdani Strategist’s Advice for Democrats in the 2026 Midterms"

Date: March 28, 2026
Host: Susan Glasser
Co-hosts: Jane Mayer, Evan Osnos
Guest: Morris Katz, political strategist

---

Episode Overview

The episode delves into the Democratic Party’s strong position going into the 2026 midterms amid President Trump’s slumping approval ratings, economic woes, and the controversial war with Iran. The hosts analyze the Democratic opportunity, the party’s perennial anxieties, and welcome Morris Katz—a leading strategist associated with left-leaning insurgent Zoran Mamdani—for advice on message, strategy, and the meaning of “outsider” politics in 2026.

---

Key Discussion Points and Insights

1. Democrats Poised for Gains, But Are They Ready?

[01:42–06:30]

• Optimism for Democrats: Host Susan Glasser observes that everything points to a favorable midterm for Democrats: Trump’s approval at record lows, widespread dissatisfaction over the Iran war, and surprising Democratic wins in state and local races—including flipping a seat in Mar-a-Lago’s own district.
• Cautious Skepticism: The hosts question whether Democrats will succumb to the historical tendency to “snatch defeat from the jaws of victory” (Evan Osnos, [03:01]).
  • Quote: “Is this Democrats are gonna win, but they might just screw it up again?” — Susan Glasser [02:52]
• Redistricting and Dark Money: Jane Mayer notes that Republican gerrymandering hasn’t delivered expected gains, but the GOP holds a massive fundraising edge; Democrats also still suffer from a negative party brand.

2. The Iran War as a Political and Economic Flashpoint

[06:56–12:35]

• Trump’s war in Iran has proven unpopular, especially as it fails to quickly achieve objectives while hurting energy and consumer prices at home.
• Hosts’ Take: The war is a political gift for Democrats—connecting Trump’s promises with his failures (lower prices, avoid war) and the lived reality of high gas prices is straightforward.
  • Quote: “Donald Trump ran on the idea that he would keep us out of war and that he would bring down prices, and instead, he brought us into a war…and prices are going up.” — Evan Osnos [07:51]
  • Gas prices are a “complete gift to the Democrats…low hanging fruit, really” — Jane Mayer [10:17]
• Deeper Dimensions: The panel wonders why Democrats aren’t hitting harder, and discuss the opportunity to tie economic pain with structural inequity and oil company profiteering.

3. Introducing Morris Katz: The Messenger from the Left

[13:55–16:46]

• Morris Katz, a 26-year-old strategist behind Zoran Mamdani’s rise, is introduced as a key advisor for insurgent campaigns.
• Preview of his stance: Katz is known for his critique of the Democratic establishment and his focus on outsider, populist messaging.

---

Interview with Morris Katz

A. Learning from Obama and Mamdani Campaigns

[14:57–16:46]

• Katz on Obama’s 2012 campaign: Praises how Obama ran a populist message against Wall Street, drawing parallels to left-wing local candidates like Mamdani.
• Governing vs. Campaigning: Emphasizes not being "apologetic" about robust government, focusing on both excellence in governance and clear communication to build faith.

B. What the Democratic Establishment Gets Wrong

[18:05–19:46]

• Katz contends that establishment Democrats mistake “protecting the institutions” for a winning strategy. Voters want change but see the same old faces.

  • Quote: "We are past that point. Like the institutions as they exist now are going to collapse. It’s not a question of whether that happens. It’s a question of who’s going to rebuild them.” — Morris Katz [18:37]

• He argues for aggressive intervention: anti-monopoly policies, social safety net expansion, taxing the rich, and work against “bad faith actors.”

C. Affordability, Inequality & Political Messaging

[21:35–22:57]

• Katz urges Democrats to do more than talk about affordability in abstract—they must identify villains and pursue real policy remedies.
  • Memorable Moment (Candid Language):
    "You can’t tell someone, ‘Hey, you’re being fucked, but I’m not going to tell you who’s fucking you.’ The absence of a villain in so much of the dialogue here is infuriating.” — Morris Katz [22:14]

D. How to Talk About Trump—and Why Affirmative Vision Matters

[24:02–25:50]

• Katz suggests Democrats should savage Trump for broken promises, but not be consumed by his antics; focus instead on material failures and present an affirmative vision.
  • Quote: “We need an affirmative message too…not just running against Donald Trump.” — Morris Katz [24:02]

E. Left, Center, and the “Mythical Moderate Voter”

[26:22–29:07]

• Katz rejects the idea that swing voters hold perfectly centrist, predictable opinions—modern moderates are unpredictable and want a mixture of left and right policies.

  • Quote: "A moderate voter…it's someone that…wants to tax billionaires, owns an assault weapon, believes in same sex marriage, but, you know, doesn’t think trans kids should be allowed to play whatever sport. That voter doesn’t exist the way people…have internalized.” — Morris Katz [26:53]

• He recommends uniting the party around a bold economic vision, with flexibility on cultural issues—a reversal of current Democratic orthodoxy.

F. On Candidates, Outsider Energy, and Campaign Credibility

[29:24–35:55]

• Core Message for 2026:
  "It is a lie that life has to be this hard in America and it’s a lie being sold by a political class that is utterly corrupt and beholden to billionaires and corporations. You deserve more. It’s government’s job to deliver.” — Morris Katz [29:24]

• On Winning without Big Donors: Advises all his candidates to refuse corporate and billionaire money to preserve credibility and win trust.

  • Quote: “There is no amount of corporate PAC money that can buy you back what you’re giving up in a credible, good faith relationship with the voters…” — Morris Katz [31:42]

• The “It Factor” in Candidates: Candidates need charisma and authenticity; it’s like dating, not a job interview.

  • Quote: "You need to think about it like it’s a date. You’re not trying to prove you’re the most qualified. You’re trying to make them fall in love with you.” — Morris Katz [35:04]

---

Debrief and Takeaways

Hosts’ Reflections

[37:25–44:49]

• Economic Inequality as a Central Theme: Jane Mayer emphasizes that anger at elite power structures transcends party and geography. AI may exacerbate these trends.
• Insider/Outsider Dynamics: Osnos notes many Americans see both national political parties as clubby, exclusionary, and out of touch, explaining outsider appeal.
  • Quote: “No matter what they do, it always seems like there is some establishment…the elites, the 1%, whatever, and that it is inaccessible, it’s a fortress.” — Evan Osnos [38:36]
• Danger and Appeal of Populism: Glasser highlights risks for Democrats if left-wing populism is seen as “far left,” but Mayer counters that it’s about top-vs-bottom, not left-vs-right.
• Billionaires & Contradictions: Irony noted when Katz, after arguing for anti-billionaire messaging, praises billionaire Illinois Governor Pritzker.
  • Quote: “They’re billionaires. They’re our billionaires.” — Jane Mayer [42:19]

The Role of Protest Movements

[44:49–47:48]

• Large “no Kings” protests are expected, continuing anti-Trump, anti-war, pro-democracy activism. Hosts debate the influence of these more diffuse, decentralized movements on the political moment.
  • Quote: "They are scattered. They are distributed. And that doesn’t make them less powerful. In fact, it may make them more powerful.” — Evan Osnos [47:13]

---

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• “Is this Democrats are gonna win, but they might just screw it up again?” — Susan Glasser [02:52]
• “We are past that point. Like the institutions as they exist now are going to collapse. It’s not a question of whether that happens. It’s a question of who’s going to rebuild them.” — Morris Katz [18:37]
• "You can’t tell someone, ‘Hey, you’re being fucked, but I’m not going to tell you who's fucking you.’" — Morris Katz [22:14]
• "It is a lie that life has to be this hard in America and it’s a lie being sold by a political class that is utterly corrupt and beholden to billionaires and corporations. You deserve more." — Morris Katz [29:24]
• “You need to think about it like it’s a date. You’re not trying to prove you’re the most qualified. You’re trying to make them fall in love with you.” — Morris Katz [35:04]
• “They’re billionaires. They’re our billionaires.” — Jane Mayer [42:19]
• “They are scattered. They are distributed. And that doesn’t make them less powerful. In fact, it may make them more powerful.” — Evan Osnos [47:13]

---

Timestamps for Important Segments

• Democratic prospects & political landscape: [01:42–06:30]
• Iran War and Democratic messaging: [06:56–12:35]
• Guest introduction—Morris Katz: [13:55]
• Obama/Mamdani campaign lessons: [14:57–16:46]
• Establishment critique: [18:05–19:46]
• Affordability, villains, and messaging: [21:35–22:57]
• Talking about Trump: [24:02–25:50]
• Left vs. Center, the “mythical moderate”: [26:22–29:07]
• The outsider, donations, and credibility: [29:24–35:55]
• Host debrief and reflections: [37:25–47:48]

---

Summary Flow & Tone

The episode is energetic and candid, peppered with sharp humor and irreverence (particularly from guest Morris Katz). The panel explores serious strategic questions for Democrats in 2026, giving space to the tension between establishment caution and populist energy on the left, while directly connecting national politics to kitchen-table issues like war and inflation. The conversation concludes by situating Democratic strategy within a broader landscape of economic disappointment, anti-elite rage, and grassroots activism.

---

For Listeners:

This episode offers both granular political diagnosis and big-picture strategic insight for Democrats (and any political observer), all through the lens of a new, charismatic strategist who wants to pivot the party away from both Trump-centrism and centrist caution. It’s a must-listen for those seeking to understand how internal party debate, generational change, and external protest energy are re-shaping American politics in real time.

Transcript

[Narrator/Advertiser]

Every idea starts with a problem. Warby Parker's was simple. Glasses are too expensive. So they set out to change that. By designing glasses in house and selling directly to customers, they're able to offer prescription eyewear that's expertly crafted and unexpectedly affordable. Warby Parker glasses are made from premium materials like impact resistant polycarbonate and custom acetate. And they start at just $95, including prescription lenses. Get glasses made from the good stuff. Stop by a Warby Parker store near you.

[Jane Mayer]

We actually have kind of some family news here. Evan Osnos is now the father of a dog.

[Susan Glaser]

Sort of a stepfather, to be honest.

[Evan Osnos]

Secrets have been revealed in these difficult times for our nation. Everybody is looking for comfort. And for our household, it turns out to be a 13 year old cockapoo. So, yeah. So you guys have been preaching the gospel on dogs for now years.

[Jane Mayer]

Have you been converted?

[Evan Osnos]

Yeah. Okay, enough. All right. Admit it.

[Jane Mayer]

They're the best.

[Evan Osnos]

Oh, they really actually are pretty great, I have to say. I have to say.

[Susan Glaser]

Come on.

[Evan Osnos]

Good news are looking up around the house.

[Susan Glaser]

Well, Ellie welcomes a new member of the Maisie. Ellie welcomes Mazie, as does Rosie.

[Evan Osnos]

Thank you, Ellie and Rosie, thank you, as do we, for welcoming Maisie into the fold of political dogs.

[Susan Glaser]

Welcome to the Political Scene from the New Yorker, a weekly discussion about the big questions in American politics. I'm Susan Glaser and I'm joined by my colleagues Evan Osnos and Jane Mayer. As ever. Hi, Evan. Hi, Jean.

[Evan Osnos]

Good morning, guys.

[Jane Mayer]

Hi.

[Susan Glaser]

So great to be with you. Okay, so this week I've been thinking about Will Rogers famous line. I'm not a member of an organized political party. I'm a Democrat. All things would indicate that 2026 is lining up very much in the Democrats favor. Let's be real about that. In these midterm elections, we haven't talked about that much in the podcast, so I'm glad we're gonna dig into it this week. Donald Trump's approval ratings have sunk to the lowest levels of either of his two terms in office. And his numbers are even worse when you look at things that Americans actually care about, like the economy or prices. They're not big fans of the new war in Iran that he's launched. Early indications from elections around the country seem pretty strong for Democrats. Just this week, in fact, Democrats flipped a state House seat in Palm Beach County, Florida. As in right in Donald Trump's backyard, the very same district where Mar A Lago is located. There's a bigger story here. Since last year, Democrats have Been flipping state legislative seats all across the country. They've won governor's races in New Jersey and Virginia. They've won big mayoral races. So looking ahead to the midterms, Evan, is this. Democrats are gonna win, but they might just screw it up again.

[Evan Osnos]

Question, will they snatch defeat from the jaws of victory, as it were? Look, I think that there's a lot of pretty positive indicators out there right now. Democrats only need a three seat pickup to win the House. And if you follow the Cook Political Report, which of course is a nonpartisan analysis, they recently moved 18 seats into the Democrats favor. That's a big swing. They don't do that casually. And you know, one of the big questions, and we'll kind of hash this out, is how much is this about getting Democrats to show up? How much is this about getting Independents and Republicans who are disenchanted, telling little indicator out of Palm beach that the Democrat who won there named Emily Gregory says if you look at the numbers, it's pretty clear that a lot of independents and Republicans must have voted for me. She said. So something is happening, Jane, what is

[Susan Glaser]

in the air as far as you're concerned?

[Jane Mayer]

I mean, certainly there's an awful lot of optimism on the Democratic side. Democrats I know, are already laying plans for what kinds of investigations they're gonna lead in Congress if they get the majority. So there's certainly a lot of optimism on that side. And one of the things that's been interesting is that as you guys will remember, there was a big effort by the Republicans to try to fix the maps in their favor. And everyone thought, oh my God, they're gonna make up for it by just gerrymandering districts in their favor. But the kind of went hand to hand in combat on that. And it appears that it's gonna come out to be awash. So that maneuver did not give the advantage back to the Republicans that Republicans thought they'd have.

[Susan Glaser]

Yeah, well, it's interesting you mentioned the kind of either rational or irrational exuberance as the case may be. You know, this is still Democrats we're talking about. And so you gotta wonder if they really can pull it off. If first of all, Jane, the dark money expert, I noticed that Republicans have an enormous advantage heading into this. Hundreds of millions of dollars more on hand than Democrats do. That's one factor. There's still the factor that Democrats coming out of the 2024 election, they have a pretty negative brand as a party. Although when you actually look at this is a choice. Joe Biden's old Line about I'm not running against God here. We're run a specific political party. Democrats seem to have in all of the polls, the momentum, the turnout, independents. Oh my goodness, have you seen those numbers? I mean, they're remarkable. There's something like 70% of young independents. Just the kind of people who might have turned the election for Donald Trump in 2024. These people, it's hard to envision them ever going back to Trump and the Republicans at this point. But I just, I feel like I'm glad we're gonna dig into all of this because it's still not settled exactly how are gonna approach this midterm and whether they can capitalize on what looks to be a blue wave building and

[Jane Mayer]

whether they have a message beyond just anti Trump. I mean, I think that's always a question in terms of irrational exuberance. I have heard that James Carville, the sort of legendary consultant that basically rode into prominence with Bill Clinton, is predicting that the Senate too is gonna go to the Democrats. I think a lot of people think that might be irrational exuberance, but there a lot of momentum and excitement on the Democratic side at this point.

[Evan Osnos]

Well, and you'll remember, Jane, of course, Carville caused a lot of controversy when he said, look, Democrats best strategy right now is essentially to do nothing, sit on your hands and let Donald Trump implode. And here we are a few months later and Donald Trump is imploding. But there's also a lot of changes on the field. And the question is, what should Democrats be saying about things like the war in Iran? What exactly should Democrats be saying about some of the big issues which have come up since then?

[Susan Glaser]

And actually I'm excited because our guest today is someone who can speak to that very much from one wing, the left wing of the Democratic Party. We have Morris Katz, the political strategist behind Zoran Mandani's rise. He's now working on some of the marquee races around the country, including Graham Plattner's controversial primary campaign in Maine Senate race. And so I think we're gonna get a really interesting perspective later today. But let's talk a little bit about the Iran war. We are now having this conversation almost exactly at the four week mark of this conflict. It's not at all clear that there are any real peace talks happening, although Donald Trump says they are. But Donald Trump also says again and again that the war was actually won. So it's a little bit confusing that we have to send thousands and thousands of American ground troops to The Middle East. Does that mean that they have to maybe win the war all over again? What do you think?

[Evan Osnos]

You know, I think, look, the Democrats are in a difficult position. I don't think there's a whole lot of people that were cheering for the idea of a nuclearized Iran. I think there are a lot of people who were not sad to see the ayatollahs go. And yet there is this big fat fact facing us, which is Donald Trump ran on the idea that he would keep us out of war and that he would bring down prices, and instead, he brought us into a war in the Middle east, and prices are going up. So that seems to be kind of like a big, obvious pitch across the plate for Democrats. But what you're hearing a lot of is actually talk about process. You know, things like people demanding hearings. Why is it that we weren't asked to vote on whether this war should happen or not? So, I mean, this is a genuine question to you guys. Susan, is that a good idea to focus on? Does that sort of allow them to dodge the question of whether the war is a good idea, or should they go straight on and say, we reject this war from day one?

[Susan Glaser]

Yeah, it's very interesting. I think you're right that you've seen, especially initially, a little bit of a dance. What I've noticed is that Democrats have become much more forceful as the war has gone on. There was some uncertainty at the beginning about whether it was gonna be a quick kind of decapitation and move on, when it's been clear that Trump has not achie achieved that goal. And of course, now he's gonna pretend that that never was the goal in the first place. That's important. The strategic mess that's happening here that has, I think, emboldened Democratic criticism of the war, because it's obvious that Donald Trump came out saying he was gonna change the regime and take over the oil. And instead, he's locked himself into a really problematic situation where Iran has turned off the spigot for 20% of the world's oil and gas, which passes through the Strait of Hormuzzi. I want to go back, though, to the politics of this, because I think we're seeing it sort of crystallize in real time. But I actually, maybe I disagree a little bit. To me, it seems like a political gimme to the Democrats. Democrats were already coalescing in a pretty strong way around the country. Again, there's local conditions. But on this idea that Donald Trump came to office saying he was going to make things better for Americans and deal with out of control prices instead of. He's literally driven up not only the cost of oil, but it's gonna affect every single price for just about everything. I mean, when you drive up the price of energy, you drive up the price of food, you drive up the price of manufactured goods. To me, that seems like a gimme for Democrats, but yeah, totally.

[Jane Mayer]

I mean, 100%. I think the only thing that's mystifying to me is why you don't hear the opposition even more forcefully coming out of the Democrats on the Hill. I mean, you do hear some of it. A lot of it is cast as kind of a consumer issue, as you say, prices, gas. But it's such an easy issue really. As you say, it's just, you know, low hanging fruit, really. I mean, and the thing about gas prices is that everybody sees actually the numbers. I mean, it's one of those few items that you buy where you can see every single day how the prices are going up. Eggs are a little more complic, but gas prices, everybody sees the whole thing. It is a complete gift to the Democrats. Except for the fact that it's incredibly upsetting situation too. I mean, this isn't something that anybody feels good about. I mean, we're all worried. This is dangerous, People are dying, we're afraid of American troops being sent. And maybe for nothing, the Iranian regime is hideous. And I mean, it's a very disturbing situation. So it's not like a happy issue.

[Evan Osnos]

Well, one of the things I think we're gonna talk about with our guests in a second, Morris Katz, is that question of rising prices actually is a wedge into a larger issue, which is about these feelings of inequity in American life. There are some people who frankly don't have to care about rising gas prices. A lot of them are people running this country right now in the sense that they're not the people who are feeling the pinch. And so one of the moves is whether or not Democrats are in the position to be able to say, yes, we're talking about gas prices. But really what this is about is about a profound imbalance in power and money. It's about the billionaire class. That's the kind of question that is a strategic.

[Jane Mayer]

And even beyond just the billionaire class, there is one group for whom this is just a great boon economically, and that's the oil companies. The American oil companies are making billions in profits.

[Susan Glaser]

So is Vladimir Putin.

[Jane Mayer]

Well, there you go. For all these reasons, I'm really glad we're gonna get to talk to someone who's a new generation of political consultant, a 26 year old.

[Susan Glaser]

All right, well, we're gonna take a quick break and when we come back, we'll be joined by political strategist Morris Katz to talk about the Democrats and the future of the party. This is the political scene from the New Yorker.

[Narrator/Advertiser]

Wired has always put a microscope on the people, power and forces shaping our world. Uncanny Valley brings that same fearless reporting straight to your feed. Is DOGE finally over? Will AI actually democratize American healthcare? Each week, Wired journalists from across the newsroom are going to unpack where politics technology in Silicon Valley collide. From conversations with tech leaders across Silicon Valley, Internet fandom investigations, and government crackdowns on rigged gambling, we're taking you all over the news cycle, going straight inside the priorities, pressures and power plays driving today's biggest decisions. Uncanny Valley tackles the questions keeping you up at night and helps make sense of the future taking shape right now. Listen to new episodes every Thursday, wherever you get your podcasts.

[Susan Glaser]

So, guys, really excited about this next guest. We are joined today by Morris Katz. As we were talking about, he's the political strategist behind Zoran Mamdani's historic upset. He's now working for some of the most interesting candidates around the country in this year's midterm elections. Morris, joining us right now from an Uber, which feels very on brand for the Democratic Party's wunderkind traveling strategist. Where are you exactly today?

[Morris Katz]

I just landed in Chicago. I'm going to join David Axelrod this afternoon, actually for a conversation on the future of media strategy in the Democratic Party.

[Susan Glaser]

All right, so give us a preview of that because I think for many people, David Axelrod kind of represents one view of where the Democratic Party should head and this idea that it needs to communicate more effectively, maybe, but it needs to come right down hard on the very large center that's not being spoken to. What's going to be your rejoinder for David Axelrod?

[Morris Katz]

I think where David and I agree on a lot and I think it's interesting with a lot of the Obama kind of folks and teams, in many ways it felt like they never took over the party, but there was kind of the institutional blob of the party remain, and particularly I was like, you know, doing my homework on the, on the flight and I was rewind, rewatched every ad of the 2012 campaign where I think people can dismiss 2008 as like a, you know, lightning in a bottle. Momentum, incredible. 2012 during the unpopular incompetence surges back, it was one of the most populous presidential campaigns in American history. You know, it's ad after ad hammering Mitt Romney as a Wall street crony, one of the architects of a financial crisis. And if you in some ways look at that message, it is not radically dissimilar to certain elements of the message of Mayor Madani's campaign. Whereas we have an affordability crisis. Do you want to put the same corrupt people back in charge? And I think, you know, there's a connection there that others have not picked up on for whatever reason.

[Susan Glaser]

I'm so glad you brought up the Obama campaign because I've been thinking a lot about your incredible ride that you and Mamdani have had over the last year. And we were all here and remember both the incredible momentum that the Obama folks came into Washington with, but also the out of control expectations for so many people. I mean, I really think there were people, understandably, who thought, this guy is the future of American politics. He's gonna stop the rise of the seas, he's gonna make change. And I think about that when I think about those incredible promises that Mayor Mamdani made for people now starting to collide a little bit with the reality of getting stuff done. How are you feeling about the expectations moment for a candidate like Mamdani Already

[Morris Katz]

with not even 100 days in, we've seen an agreement with the governor on universal child care on day nine of the administration, hopefully. But we see a rent freeze coming soon. I think there are ongoing negotiations, some other priorities. But I think at the kind of sector of the mayor's promise is a belief that people should be allowed to expect things from their government. And a vision of, you know, that I don't think is constrained to one policy, but rather the idea that we're not going to be apologetic about government's role in people's lives, that government should be big, it should be robust, and it also should be excellent. And I think what you're seeing, whether it's some of the cuts we're starting to implement around unnecessary reckless spending, whether it's cutting red tape and regulation to make it easier to build, it's this kind of dual mission of making government excellent. And only with excellent government can we then expand it. The communication component of this, where I think a lot of people dismiss communication as like a campaign tactic and it's like, oh, the mayor's tiktoks are cute, but what does it really do? I think it builds faith in government. It brings people into the governing process and that's something you're seeing continue. And so, you know, it's governing is not easy. But I think we want to, you know, no one's naive to that, but I think we want people to feel like they're a part of that process too.

[Jane Mayer]

Well, Maurice, I want to go back to what you were talking about as this kind of this Democratic blob that does not get it, that you're saying that sort of the Obama campaign did get it. Even in 2012, you've said that no one has a worse read off on what electable means and less of a pulse on voters than the democratic establishment in D.C. what exactly is the establishment getting wrong? Why is it getting it wrong, do you think? And what would be right?

[Morris Katz]

You're gonna get me in shovel here. Look, I think. Let's talk about Maine for a second. I'm working with Graham Platner. Graham nine months ago was an oyster farmer with 0% name ID and currently he's up 30 points on the incumbent governor who's been in public office like twice as long as I've been alive. That is because there is such a fundamentally deep frustration with the status quo, both from an economic standpoint, societal standpoint. And I think the idea that we're just going to kind of match that with the same people who've been in power all along makes no sense. And I think there's the, the reality that many of Democratic leadership want to see the Democratic Party play a role of protecting the institutions, protecting the powers that be. We are past that point. Like the institutions as they exist now are going to collapse. It's not a question of whether that happens or not. It's a question of who's going to rebuild them.

[Jane Mayer]

Which institutions do you mean? I mean, are you talking about Social Security and Medicare? Are you talking about the dnc? I mean, which institutions do you mean?

[Morris Katz]

I'm talking about the broader kind of structural promises of the economy. I'm talking about the ways in which people engage with the social safety net. I'm talking about the way we view America's role in the world as we kind of stomp right into another endless war while we continue to not have health care gets rolled back. I think the fundamental promise that people feel with the government is going to change. And I think that there's always been an idea of like an over caution. You know, we just need to keep this thing intact because it's kind of fundamentally working and people willing want to see bigger risks or Swings of more aggressive vision for intervention on anti monopoly legislation, on expansion of social safety nets, on aggressive taxing of the rich and going after bad faith actors, whether they be corporations or billionaires. And we're politicians aren't doing it.

[Evan Osnos]

That is a really interesting realm of this conversation is essentially what are we talking about when we talk about affordability. And you know, I've always been interested in the language around this. I mean, in some places you can talk very plainly, one can talk very plainly about inequality, about imbalances of power and of money. In other places where maybe we still kind of have the residue of that belief that you can, as Barack Obama put it now so many years ago, you can make it if you try an idea which is really kind of desiccated in a lot of the country, people don't believe that. And that's a source of tremendous political energy. My question is this. Are there places where you can talk about affordability and then places where you can talk about inequality and vice versa, or are they different things? Are we talking about the different facets of the same problem or separate issues?

[Morris Katz]

I think different facets of the same problem. But I will say like one thing that I think that President Obama did, well, the mayor does. It's driving me crazy right now that the way people I think are co opting affordability and you're starting to hear politicians go and talk about affordability as if their job is a political pundit. You know, like they show they're like, you know, affordability is a big issue and we need to talk about affordability. And that's why I'm here right now talking to you about affordability. And it's like that is an the thing. Affordability needs to be partnered with real policies that are going to make people's lives actually affordable. And am I allowed to curse on this or no? Yes.

[Susan Glaser]

This is not yes.

[Morris Katz]

And so I didn't want to offend the good people. New Yorker I It's like you can't tell someone, hey, you're being fucked, but I'm not going to tell you who's fucking you. Yeah. And the absence of a villain in so much of the dialogue here is infuriating. Where it's like, people know it's not an accident that their paycheck doesn't go as far as it used to. It's not an accident that every one of their favorite small businesses on their street or in their road closed and has been replaced by a corporate chain that doesn't have the same quality product or pay the same wages. It is the system that's broken, working as intended for a small percentage of people at the top. Like that is what's happening. And you need to call that out or it's meaningless.

[Susan Glaser]

Okay, Morris, so let's talk about the villain who has united Democrats as nothing else has over the last 10 years, Donald Trump. I know in Democratic primary season and Democrats love nothing more than to rip each other apart, but I'm actually really interested in your views on how much Donald Trump is the villain. You talked about institutions falling apart or a war starting. It's not a war that really has been started by the American people or the Congress, even the Republicans in this is a war that started by Donald Trump. Yet we're 10 years in and Democrats are still struggling. Is he actually an existential threat who is going to rip the core principles of our country apart and therefore needs to bring people together? I think there's a lot of people who agree with that. And then there are plenty of Democrats who think, no, let's talk about health care, let's talk about prices, let's meet as your guide did. And you attended that, I think with Donald Trump in the White House, I'm just curious, like, when you're thinking about 20, 26 and winning elections this fall, how are you going to advise people to talk about Donald Trump?

[Morris Katz]

I think we should call out the fraudulence of the President who promised to end forever wars and lower costs. And right now costs are higher and we're starting a new forever war. And I think that we can message pretty cleanly and directly on that. Where I think we get into trouble is when the Democratic Party overly engages on the parts of Trump that hate them or love them or whatever are not particularly directly impacting the day to day lives of people. And you know, it's like, can you believe he did, you know, had said ABC thing in a press conference when it's not actually something that has any real influence outside being kind of offensive. And it's so, I think the party gets so distracted so easily. Then we're suddenly talking about, oh, you know, Donald Trump said this offensive thing. And then Trump gets to be talking about the economy, the Republicans get to be talking about the economy, and then we look out of touch. I think we need to be the ones who are disciplined and focused. And I think where Trump is not, we should be calling him out on it and running against it. But I also think, like, hopefully we have learned 10 years into this that we need an affirmative message too. And it's not enough to just must be running against Donald Trump. And I think we're going to continue to leave that vacuum open unless we can run a campaign that says Donald Trump said he'd end forever wars and lower costs. And he hasn't. And that will be successful. I think even more successful would be a campaign off the idea of we are going to end forever wars and we are going to lower costs by taking on monopolies, by taking on price gouging, by raising wages, by taxing billionaires more. And I think it's like an affirmative vision is still needed if we want a kind of not just to win back a House majority, but to win the Senate and to win a generational majority.

[Jane Mayer]

So I wanted to ask you about, you know, there's a lot of thumb sucking in the party, the sort of, as you've referred to the ecclesiast sort of end of, you know, world of politics where there's an argument about do you go to the left or do you go to the center? What do you do about all these cultural issues, dei, immigration, do you have a playbook on what Democrats should do about this? Should there be one playbook on it? Do you see it as a problem that's gonna hang up Democratic candidates?

[Morris Katz]

I think about 75% of the time if we just do the opposite of whatever Matt Iglesias is saying, we'll be okay. But in the absence of that, I think there's an issue with the Iglesias of the world and the people who think about kind of a continued the spectrum being what it's always been that like the, the mythical moderate voter who wants a public health option but not Medicare for all, who wants to see attacks on people making more than 50 million but not people making more than 10 million, who wants common sense background checks but not an assault weapons ban, and where they're just kind of middle downline. That is not that voter doesn't exist. A moderate voter who self identifies as moderate like in these met people out the trail and focus groups or you know, and it's, there's someone that like, hey, I believe in Medicare for all. I want to tax the billionaires. Also I own an assault weapon and I believe in same sex marriage, but I don't think trans kids should be allowed to play whatever sport they want. And I also like care really deeply about how manufacturing is implemented and what tariffs are made for, you know, leather jackets. Like it's, you know, there's not, it doesn't exist the way people Kind of have internalized. And I think we can be that way too. And like, we should be a big tent party. There should be room for disagreement on a lot of things, but we should be united by a kind of economic vision and then allow room for flexibility on social issues. And I think right now we in some ways have the exact opposite where we have a big tent united on social issues with very little room to actually, if you're taking, if you're talking, if you're saying the word oligarchy, you're going to be kind of pushed out to the edges. And I think like everyone made such a big deal about the Trump, you know, Kamala's up there.

[Evan Osnos]

Even the liberal media was shocked. Kamala supports taxpayer funded sex changes for prisoners and illegal aliens.

[Susan Glaser]

Every transgender inmate would have access.

[Evan Osnos]

Kamala's for they them. President Trump is for you.

[Morris Katz]

I'm Donald J. Trump. That was obviously a very effective ad. Everyone talks about the Kamala's for they them part. I think the more important part is Trump's for you. And like Kamala was vulnerable to that attack because she didn't make it clear enough who she was for so then they could throw that sticker on her and it stayed. If we're really disciplined in our messaging and focused and say, and believe in the right things and say the right things, then I think those attacks bounce off of you as much. And I think like the American people know that a 99.999% of the time Republicans are trying to talk about trans issues. It's just a fucking distraction and we should be able to have the ability to call it out. But we only will if we're able to say they're talking about this because they want to cut taxes for their billionaire donors. A lot of Democrats can't say that right now because they're taking money from the same billionaire donors.

[Evan Osnos]

So if you were going to give a message to a Democratic candidate right now in 2026 who is looking to say, okay, I want to figure out how do I take a piece of this Platner story, a piece of this, a piece of that, a bit of what happened in New York City, what is the single message you would tell Democratic candidates right now?

[Morris Katz]

It is a lie that life has to be this hard in America and it's a lie being sold by a political class that is utterly corrupt and beholden to billionaires and corporations. You deserve more. It's government's job to deliver.

[Susan Glaser]

So basically your ideal candidate, in effect in any district is an outsider Right. Is somebody who is not associated at all with, with the governing class. I'm curious what you make. It's very early in the primary season so far, but in some of the races we've seen progressive candidates win. But in some of the primary races, like in Illinois, where you are today, progressives suffered some defeats. You had the governor J.B. pritzker endorsing a number of people who won in contested races. What are the sort of nuts and bolts political lessons that you're looking at so far from where the Democratic electorate is? I mean, and what I see in the polls is a lot of Democrats and also independents where they can vote in primaries, saying, I will crawl over broken glass to send a message to Donald Trump that you're ruining the country.

[Morris Katz]

I think we're seeing an electorate that is fired up and that is a good thing. And I think even in Illinois, I think seeing Lt. Governor Governor Stratton succeed in that primary, she was the, the most progressive candidate by a decent amount in that primary. And I think, you know, then there's different House primaries with different dynamics at play. But I think you're seeing, you know, people who want to send a message, but the difference between like this cycle and maybe 2018 is people also want to be sending a message to the Democratic establishment as much as Trump. And they want to be sending a message of. Feels like a broader sense, systemic condemnation than just an expression of me or, you know, any Democrat or just I will want to, you know, stick it to Trump. It's an expression like we need something to fundamentally change. And I think, you know, the change candidate takes different forms ideologically. But I think like, being a change candidate, being an outsider has never been more important or popular.

[Jane Mayer]

You know, you talk about how that the Democrats too are taking money from and are beholden to the billionaire donors. Are you telling your candidates not to take those kinds of donations?

[Morris Katz]

Yes. I say this. Basically everyone I work with is like, there is no amount of corporate PAC money that can buy you back what you're giving up in a credible, good faith relationship with the voters you're trying to represent. Like, you just. I think it's, I think it's literally impossible. Simple. I hate when people take, you see an ad of a candidate talking about lowering the cost of healthcare and they're taking money from Big Pharma and then of course their opponent's gonna hit them on that. And that is why people hate politics. You have no credibility. And credibility is the most important thing right now. It's the same it's why these outsiders are doing better, because they're more credible than political establishment. And taking corporate money, taking money from the kind of corrupt billionaire class, it undercuts your credibility there in a really profound way.

[Jane Mayer]

And you can win without it. Yes, you can make enough on small donations.

[Morris Katz]

You can. And like, I do think I do, like, if you build it, they will come. And it's funny because I'll, yeah, I'll talk to politicians too, I don't work with, but are, you know, asking for advice or something. And some of them who takes over money and they're like, well, you know, I just, it's where my money comes from. I don't, you know, I don't get this grassroots money. And it's like, yeah, brother, you don't get this grassroots money because you're taking money from corporations and you're taking money from apac and the average Democratic donor does not want to support that or engage in that. If you have the political courage to not do that, then the money will come.

[Evan Osnos]

You know, this is a little farther down the road than we were planning to talk about. A question about 2028. I mean, honestly, when I hear what you're saying, which makes a lot of sense about the power of the outsider right now, who do you like? I mean, we're not hearing names of an outsider at the top of the list. Is there somebody that we should be talking about that we're not?

[Morris Katz]

I think there are a number of people who are doing and saying a lot of the right things and none of them meet the criteria I've just fully outlined. But I also think, like, candidates grow and surprise you in a lot of ways. Even like Zaun has always been incredible. The Zaun of today is not the Zorn of a year and a half ago when he launched his campaign. The Obama of 2008 was not the Obama of 2006 or 2004 or whatever else. So I think you can see people grow. I think some of the things that I would flag that are interesting, I think that are happening right now is if you look at John Ossoff's messaging, I think around the Epstein class and around corruption is really interesting and smart. I think at their moment sense that you see kind of, you know, if AOC were to decide to run, the kind of brow, the enthusiasm, the larger electorate she reaches to and the kind of working class credentials she has. I think Ro Khanna's work on Epstein, on AI, is all really interesting. And then I think like, you know, I'm in Illinois now. I think Pritzker has done interesting stuff. Like, you know, I think there are a number of different good candidates who haven't checked all the boxes yet. But that's why we have a primary. And people are going to get better. And who knows, maybe someone we're not accepting will end up being it.

[Jane Mayer]

You've talked about how there's one thing people don't really mention that much in politics, which is that candidates have to have this kind of it factor. They've got to have something, and you can see it when you meet with them. What is the it factor? And can it be taught by an outside consultant like you?

[Morris Katz]

If it could, I would charge more. People would be like, oh, like Zone, Sonic, Grand Platner. Like, what is your secret? I'm, like, picking the right candidates. And I think working with a Zone or working with the gram. It's like coaching Michael Jordan where it's like, you know, not talking like, you know, Michael Jones, a star player. He didn't have a ring until he was working with Phil Jackson, but also Michael Jordan was getting 35 at night no matter what. And I think you want generational talents, and you need the right message and you need the right methods, but candid quality is essential. I think the way we need to think about candid quality is a little bit like, sometimes we treat it like a job interview, and it's like, okay, who's the most qualified? Who's put together the best presentation? You need to think about it like it's a date. You're not trying to prove you're the most qualified. You're trying to make them fall in love with you. And I think that that's hard to teach.

[Jane Mayer]

The hinge version of politics, it's like swipe right or swipe left. Left, I guess.

[Susan Glaser]

All right, Morris, thank you.

[Morris Katz]

So far, far left.

[Susan Glaser]

We'll see who, who how you do with David Axelrod later today. Morris, thank you so much for joining the show from the back of what seems to be a very accommodating Uber.

[Morris Katz]

Yes, well, thank you all so much. I appreciate you.

[Susan Glaser]

The political scene from the New Yorker will be back in just a moment. If you've been enjoying the show, please leave us a rating and a review on the podcast platform of your choice. And while you're there, don't forget to hit the follow button so you never miss an episode. Thank you so much for listening.

[Narrator/Advertiser]

The justice system can be intimidating, but it doesn't have to be. Join us to hold public agencies accountable because we all want to drink from the same cup of justice. With tales from the newsroom and the courtroom, our hosts create the perfect trifecta of legal experience, journalistic integrity, and a fire lit to expose the truth wherever it leads. Search for cup of justice wherever you get your podcast or visit cupofjusticepod.com.

[Susan Glaser]

All right, so that was really interesting. I mean, I'm glad he brought up 2018, because in some ways the message of Democrats is quite similar, actually. It's basically, yeah, Donald Trump is terrible. And also we're going to talk to you about real problems. That was Nancy Pelosi's motto. We're going to talk about health care and now we're going to talk about gas prices. But the difference is he's also running against the entire establishment of the Democratic Party. I'm curious how persuasive you guys found that as, I mean, New York City is not America.

[Jane Mayer]

Well, remains to be seen. But I think that this, as I look at the numbers in this country that show an increasing aggregation of incredible wealth in the hands of a fewer and fewer people, I think that economic inequality is not an issue just for the big blue cities. It's a problem all over the country and all over the world, actually. And many people think AI is gonna just make it worse. And so I think that he's onto something if he can come up with and his candidates can come up with credible solutions to say it's not an

[Evan Osnos]

accident that he came out of New York in the sense that meaning he didn't come out of Washington. And I think that gives him an advantage in understanding the mood of the country. Jane, I agree with a lot of what you're saying. I think I spent a lot of time out in places, particularly recently in rural places, where if you ask people the single issue that they're angry about, it's the fact that they can't seem to break into the club. No matter what they do, it always seems like there is some establishment, call it whatever the term of the moment is, the elites, the 1%, whatever, and that it is inaccessible, it's a fortress. And that is really what his candidates across these multiple geographies have figured out. That is a really potent idea. He had a line in a story some months ago in which he said that, look, it may be hard for people in Washington to understand, but if you've wanted to be president since you were 5 years old, a lot of the country thinks you're a loser. And that's a big insight, actually, because, look, we live In a town where a lot of people have wanted to be president since they were five years old. And I think they would have a very uphill climb right now to try to connect with people.

[Susan Glaser]

Yeah. I think his visceral channeling of the residual anger that so many Democrats as well as Independents feel not only toward Trump or Republicans, but also toward their own party, the idea that people in Washington thought it was okay for Joe Biden to run for reelection. It was only when his sort of implosion on live television forced the question. I personally think that that residual is even worse than anything Kamala Harris did. Even I take his point. I mean, I'm not sure it convinced me, but I take his point. On the Harris campaign or the they them ad. I think it's about Biden and this idea that Democratic elected representatives, that these best and brightest in the White House, that they were willing to foist a guy in his mid-80s on the country and that he's channeling that still in this midterm election. I think that's where he's very powerful. Absolutely agree with Jane on the inequality and the sort of the billionaire rage that's fueling a lot of our politics right now. My question, though, is I thought the end. You could just imagine someone who wasn't cheering for Morris Katz, who would listen to that at the end and say that was a gift to any opposition, that he's saying he wants a Democratic Party to be the far, far left version of itself. I don't think there's any real indication that that's what the country wants this fall.

[Jane Mayer]

Of course, he was joking at that point because his message more seriously is it's not about left. Right. It's about top versus bottom. And he's got kind of an economic message on that, which he thinks goes across the parties. I mean, I think one thing that's smart that he's done is to look at what the appeal of Trump was. And he has pointed out that Trump spoke to people unlike the other Republican candidates in Trump said people like Social Security, people like Medicare. He's a big government person, really. And thinking about ordinary people's needs. And what Morris Katz is saying is Democrats need to steal back the bacon from Trump on these economic issues and on the anger at the sense that they're locked out of the economy and out of the American dream.

[Susan Glaser]

Gene, you're the, you know, you're the keeping them honest on the billionaire front. I thought. I loved that Evan asked about 2028, but I did notice that at the end, after his, like, you know, absolutely no one associated with attainment politics past, he said. And by the way, Illinois's billionaire governor, J.B. pritzker, he's saying some of the right things.

[Evan Osnos]

Yeah.

[Jane Mayer]

Oops. Yeah.

[Morris Katz]

What was that?

[Jane Mayer]

You know, I mean, so they're billionaires.

[Susan Glaser]

They're billionaires.

[Jane Mayer]

They're our billionaires. And honestly, I'll tell you something, there's some really interesting studies that look at the billionaires from both parties. And the one thing that they almost universally find is that billionaires of both parties kind of don't like redistributive economic policies. Maybe that's not true of Pritzker, I don't know. But really it's interesting. The ultra rich have a kind of pro ultra rich policy agenda when it comes down to it.

[Evan Osnos]

Well, I will say I was surprised to hear him mention Pritzker. I think, I think it was the end of a list that started with Jon Ossoff, which is interesting too because, you know, a sitting member of the Senate, not exactly an outsider. However, that language, as we know, can be taken up and can be utilized. So it's not as if the person has to be, you know, a non politician. But I think what, you know, one of the things that surprised me about that was we seem to have found a point of agreement between what Morris Katz is saying and what James Carville is saying, somebody we talked about early on the show. He has talked about J.B. pritzker as somebody that he thinks could end up tapping into the moment, which I don't know. A billionaire for an anti billionaire time is a surprise.

[Susan Glaser]

It's a surprise. But I'll end with.

[Evan Osnos]

And maybe the right answer actually, but

[Susan Glaser]

I'll end with this observation. There were people who said at the very beginning of the Trump era, which is now a decade ago, that where it's all gonna end up is with Democrats embracing a form of just the kind of left wing populism that Jane's talking about. And essentially we're gonna get a rich guy to wail away against the corrupt establishment and I'm gonna come from outside Washington and I'm gonna be so rich that I'm gonna have no conflicts of interest and I'm gonna attack.

[Jane Mayer]

I mean, in the end of the day, though, not to be so cynical, is that what matters is not what they say, it's what they do. I mean, and we've had presidents like Franklin Roosevelt who were very upper crust, right. They actually enacted policies that really raised up the prospects of the ordinary man, no.

[Evan Osnos]

And one could argue it's not an accident that that's the case. Oftentimes that gives them, in a sense, sort of credibility. As, you know, Donald Trump wrote into office saying, I know the games that are being played because I've played them.

[Susan Glaser]

But that's exactly the danger, is that Democrats say that's what we need.

[Evan Osnos]

Well, before we close, I want to mention something important, which is that we are this coming weekend likely to see big protests. And this gets to this question of what can be done now. Now, people are not waiting around for politicians to decide. There is likely to be the latest round of the no Kings protests are expected to be perhaps the largest protests ever in American history. We'll see if that turns out to be the case. But I'm curious, guys, what you make of this. We've watched these protests go through multiple iterations. Remember, they started off specifically against the Doge period, against the cuts that were being made to the government. Then you had them move into more of a response to ICE and the killings in Minneapolis. And now they include encompass opposition to the war in Iran. They don't seem to be shrinking or kind of losing focus. They seem to be growing. How meaningful. And what do you think the political effect of these kind of protests are?

[Jane Mayer]

I personally think the most impressive pushback we've seen against Trump has come from outside of Washington, including in Minneapolis. And these protests, because they're in so many different places at once, don't have the aggregate power, it looks like, of, you know, the marches on Washington of the past. And I kind of miss some of that visual power that you see when millions of people stream in. But I think in their own way, in their own atomized way, they're really important to show that all over the country, people feel this way.

[Susan Glaser]

Yeah. And, Evan, I'm glad you brought that up, because I think that for me, that shows the gap between kind of how our political system processes and comes up with a point of view on issues. And the conversation we're having with Morris, even though he's an outsider. It's very nuts and bolts about politics. And here's the ads I want to run. And Democrats in particular, very ideologically focused on debates within their own party, as Republicans often are focused on the debates in their party. What I think is important about the no Kings protest is that none of those debates inside the Democratic Party or inside the Republican Party really capture, I think, where a broad swath of the country is at. And I think that's with a sense of that there's chaos and division and a huge number of issues, not just one issue, that are motivating people. So I feel like it's actually a really important statement that steps outside the political process even more in some ways than the conversation we were just having.

[Evan Osnos]

And I do think that history suggests that this is the first big protest since the beginning of the war. And we know that that wars have a way of crystallizing public rage, public displeasure, public frustration in ways that almost no other issue can. So I would say watch this space. It may be that right now these protests seem, as you say, Jane, kind of scattered, which I think is a reflection. They're sort of the protest movement for the social media age. They are scattered. They are distributed. And that doesn't make them less powerful. In fact, it may make them more powerful.

[Susan Glaser]

More powerful. All right, well, we will stay tuned. I really enjoyed that conversation. Thank you, guys. And we'll be back next week.

[Jane Mayer]

So interesting. It was. It was great to hear from a new generation today, actually. So, anyway, thanks so much.

[Susan Glaser]

This has been the political Scene from the New Yorker. I'm Susan Glaser. We had research assistance today from Alex Dalia. Our producer is Nora Richard Ritchie, mixing by Mike Kutchman. Steven Valentino is our executive producer. Our theme music is by Alison Leighton Brown. Thanks for listening.

[Jane Mayer]

From prx.