Loading summary
Transcript50 lines
- [00:00]
A
There was an understanding in 2017 that we could resist the abnormal, right, we could resist Donald Trump, and that if that was successful, politics might snap back. Right? You would have a Joe Biden on one side and then, you know, to use just a name, Amitt Romney on the other, right? You would, you would restore back. And so the resistance was all that was necessary. You just had to resist that. The fact is, there's no snapping back.
- [00:39]
B
Hello, and welcome to the Politics Girl podcast. I'm your host, Lee McGowan. Let's get into it. Well, he won. And yesterday he was inaugurated. I didn't watch it. The days leading up to January 20th have already tested my faith in this country, in the federal government's ability to counter any of what's coming. And quite frankly, it's tested my faith in humanity. But as today's guest, Mark Elias, has said, no one is coming to save us. We're it. And we don't really have the luxury of giving up and letting ourselves become cynical and nihilistic. Donald Trump and his enablers want us to feel powerless and hopeless. They want us to feel that resistance is futile. And honestly, between you and me, it's easy to feel that way when you see all of these important people with way more power than you bowing down to kiss the ring. These people who could stand up to the bully, who could make a difference supporting our democracy or our Constitution or even just what's right, tripping over themselves to see who can prostrate themselves further for the Fuhrer. And it is incredibly pathetic, but it should inspire you. Because with all the talk of betas and cucks, these captains of industry are exactly that. Scared, integrity free weaklings. These billionaires and media moguls and business leaders are the weakest link in our society. But we, the majority of this country who believe in fairness and justice and the rule of law, have another choice. And I'm having Mark Elias on today to talk about it. If you don't know Mark Elias, he is an American lawyer and the founder of the Elias Law Group, a mission driven law firm committed to helping Democrats win citizens vote and progressives make change. He is also the founder of Democracy Docket, the leading progressive source of information, analysis and opinions about voting rights and election and democracy. Mark has essentially acted as democracy's white knight for years, protecting our rights and our vote, even as everyone around him seemed ready to capitulate to save themselves. This is the man who represented the Biden campaign and the DNC in their state by state response to Trump's bullshit stop the steal lawsuits. And he is still in the game after Trump got away with it all these years later. So without further ado, please welcome my guest, creator of Democracy Docket, founder of the Elias Law Group, and Democratic super lawyer Mark Elias. Welcome back, Mark.
- [02:48]
A
Thank you for having me again.
- [02:50]
B
Well, thank you for joining me. Honestly, I wish it was under different circumstances. When we spoke before the election, there was no question in my mind that the Democrats would win and we were just going to be looking at months and months of lawsuits. But fact that a handful of people in every swing state decided they would rather choose the rapist felon and his Christian nationalist techno bros instead. Honestly, it shook me. It's like a lack of imagination on my part, I guess. But yesterday was Trump's inauguration, the most expensive one in history, paid for by a bunch of super rich guys trying to curry favor. In fact, there were so many people who donated to that inauguration that I think they were at $200 million before they cut it off because they'd run out of VIP tickets. And the whole thing felt really sickening to me. So before we go into what we do next, I really do have a couple of questions for you just to address some thoughts that people are having right now. Do you mind if we just start there?
- [03:39]
A
Sure.
- [03:40]
B
Okay, great. Do you think that Trump won the election fair and square?
- [03:45]
A
Look, Donald Trump won the election. I hate to use words like fair and square or free and fair, because those are loaded and various things. There was no fraud in the outcome of the election. The ballots were accurately tabulated. So in that sense, he won fair and square. I think the question of whether or not fair and square includes continuously lying to the American public. Whether fair and square means having billionaires controlling platforms that continuously lie to the American public. You know, I think, you know, sort of stretches the definition of fair and square. But I think that if the import of the question is, do I think that the election was rigged now, Do I think that there were. There was something wrong with the vote totals or counting? No, I don't. I don't believe that there's any evidence of that. And I don't think it, it is productive for people on the left to be trafficking in that.
- [04:32]
B
Yeah. Okay. Well, I think that's very helpful for people because I think a lot of people were like, just do a forensic audit or how is it that Elon got this involved? Or, you know, like, you know, we all know that Trump ran to stay out of prison. And essentially Elon basically said he was also Making sure that he was staying out of prison. So I think it made a lot of people feel like these people would have done anything to. To win. And you're saying, yeah, and what they did was use their, you know, influence to lie to people and convince them that they were voting for something that they're never going to get. And that is different. Changing vote tabulations and such. What about the Constitution? Why do you think that the Jack Smith report didn't trigger, say, the 14th Amendment, like, isn't proof of attempting to overturn the last election grounds for his electoral votes to be invalidated under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment? Because that part of the report was really specific direct evidence of participation in the fake elector scheme. And we still just handed the country over to a treasonous felon. So is that something that we should have done differently?
- [05:35]
A
Look, I was very critical of the U.S. supreme Court's decision on this back at the beginning of last year when Colorado kicked him off the ballot for precisely that reason. I was outspoken. I wrote about it on democracy docket. I did videos about it. I was on television about it, that I thought that he was disqualified under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment. And I think the Supreme Court not just got it wrong, but I think that they got it wrong in a very cynical way. It was sort of a, like, well, this is not up to the states, but then we're not really leaving it up to anybody else. Like, in many respects, like, they subsequently then dented the immunity order. They essentially gave a gift to Donald Trump. But I think it goes broader than just that. I mean, I've also been. And here, you know, you and I may not agree. I've been very critical, frankly, of the entire justice system as it relates to Donald Trump. And I don't mean just the entire justice system parts that we don't like. I think the fact that Judge Merchant gave him assurances before the sentencing that he would not go to jail, I think was. Was wrong. I think the fact that the prosecutors in that case showed up on the, on the day of the sentencing and agreed that he shouldn't go, that he shouldn't face any penalty, was wrong. I think the fact that he was allowed to appear by video and was assured that none of nothing of this was going to inconvenience him too much, I think was wrong. I think the fact that Jack Smith let his lawyers review the final report as a courtesy. As a courtesy, what Jack Smith called an accommodation. Why did he get that accommodation? I can tell you I've Been, I've been mentioned in John Durham's independent counsel report. Hillary Clinton was tarred in that report. There wasn't any, there wasn't any courtesy or accommodation made for, for Secretary Clinton or any of the rest of the people who are mentioned in that report. And so why did Jack Smith feel the need to give that? Because what you knew was going to happen is exactly what happened, which is that Donald Trump's lawyers would then spread lies and disinformation about it and to Judge Cannon to try to block it. So, you know, I have been disappointed in almost every aspect of the way in which one side has played by norms and the other side has played not, has played by outside the lines. And I'm not saying that Democrats should play outside lines. I'm not saying that Merrick Garland should have played outside the lines. But when Merrick Garland gave his benedictory talk to the folks at the Department of Justice, he celebrated how they all followed norms. And I'm thinking what, what about this experience leaves us to think that was the right, that was the right outcome. Again, follow the law. Yes. But if you ask me, do I think that the section, the 14th, section 3 of the 14th Amendment should have been invoked by, you know, I think the Supreme Court got it wrong. And I think that there was too quick for everyone to say, all right, well, you know, it would be, it would be a big deal to disqualify Donald Trump.
- [08:24]
B
Yeah. It's all, is it all about believing in the institutions and believing in the country and holding on to this idea of democracy with hope that we can potentially fix it one day, or is it just like wishful thinking?
- [08:37]
A
Right, and that's exactly right. And so, you know, look, I have spent my career fighting for democracy in court. And we fight within the rules as they are, we fight within the laws they are, but we fight hard and we don't give up. And I would have liked to have seen in the aftermath of that Supreme Court decision, you know, whether it was other states, other legal theories, you know, the Department of Justice, you know, some greater, you know, not giving, not giving up. And I thought that Jack Smith, I realize I'm jumping from topic, topic, but to me, they're all connected. Jack Smith, even to the extent that he voluntarily dismissed the charges against Donald Trump. Well, he did that because it's a norm. He did that because that's an opinion of the, of the Office of Legal Counsel. I would have not dismissed the indictment. I would have said, you know, what if they're going to dismiss the indictment. They're going to do it when he takes office, then he can dismiss the indictment. His agent can dismiss the indictment.
- [09:27]
B
Yeah. No, I agree. I think this is why people think Democrats bring a knife to a gunfight. You know why they think that we are honestly weaklings, and I think it makes us look like weaklings. It's not that you have to play outside the rules, but you certainly have to use every single weapon.
- [09:43]
A
And I don't think it's fair to say that Democrats are weaklings. This is where I do part company, because with people who say that, like, look at my litigation, look at the things I've done for.
- [09:51]
B
Yeah, you're not a weakling. I got it.
- [09:53]
A
Look at Nancy Pelosi. I don't think anyone's going to say Nancy Pelosi is a weakling. I think. I think if you look at how Hakeem Jeffries and Chuck Schumer are according. According themselves, I don't think you'd say they're weaklings. And certainly if you look at your governor in Californ or Gavin Newsom, he's standing up against Trump. JB Pritzker in Illinois is standing against Trump. So I don't know that it's fair to say that it is all Democrats. I think that there is a divide within the Democratic Party and among progressives about how much. What we really need to focus on is the outcomes for the American people versus the process and the sort of institutions. And the fact is that Donald Trump is a menace for democracy. And what happened yesterday with the swearing in is bad for everyone in America, including, by the way, a lot of his voters and those of us who could have fought harder. I ask myself every day, is there more I could have done? Like, and we should all be asking.
- [10:42]
B
I ask myself that every day, too. Every single day. I say that. I'm like, I failed. I failed. I failed. And we can't think like that. We have to kind of come back every day. It just makes me think of the article you wrote for Democracy Docket that's called We're On Our Own. Right. So will you talk to me about your thoughts writing that piece? Because I feel like most of us who believe in democracy and fairness and the rule of law are feeling a struggle with keep fighting and demoralization. Right. And I think that's a very lonely feeling. And so would you talk to me about what you meant when you said, we're all on our own?
- [11:16]
A
Yeah. So, look, I think we have seen the utter collapse of three very important institutions for American government and American democracy. Number one, we have seen the utter collapse of the business community, which, you know, whether you like big business or don't like big business, whether you like this industry or not, one of the truths is that we have counted on business leaders and corporate leaders to view democracy and rule of law as good for business and therefore be strong supporters of it. Instead, what we have seen is them fly their private jets to Mar a Lago to see who can bow deeper, who can bend their knee more, and who can make themselves more pathetically subservient to Donald Trump and be part of his court gestures. So we have seen the utter collapse of the business community, which is really problematic. Number two, we have seen, frankly, the retreat of many parts, not all, but many parts of the legacy media. You know, one of the reasons why the work that you are doing is so important, I mean, it was important before the election. I told everyone to subscribe to all of your channels before the election. But now it's more than like a preference now. It's an essential. Because the fact is it is not just the Washington Post, it is not just cnn. It is not just certain hosts on certain broadcasts on certain networks that will go unnamed. It is a wholesale retreat of the legacy media from being entities that view themselves as pro democracy. They're not largely pro democracy. What it turns out is that they're owned by the same billionaire class or the same multinational corporations that, that, that are bending their knee for other reasons. And so if you're, if you own a rocket company and you sell things on the Internet and you want to be able to sell those things to the government and yeah, you also own a newspaper. Well, well, the newspaper is expendable. Right? And so it is critical that people reframe their thinking about the media. Right now you have more freedom. You know, I said this on a podcast on an episode with Brian Tyler Cohen that went somewhat viral. Right now, I can say on your show, you know, fuck Donald Trump. You could say, fuck Donald Trump. And the fact is, the big titans of industry, they can't say that. And the owners of legacy media, they can't say that. And so the fact is, we have seen the collapse of legacy media as a watchdog and a sentinel for democracy. And that's a big deal. And then the third one is the Republican Party. You know, I'm a partisan Democrat, I've been a partisan Democrat. But you need to have a strong two party system in order for democracy to work. And right now there is no Second party, the Republican Party, is just a personalist party of Donald Trump. There is nothing else. Donald Trump chooses the speaker. Donald Trump tells the speaker which members of leadership to fire. Donald Trump tells John Thune, who he's going to send for nominations. He's going to expect every Republican to vote to confirm them, which, by the way, they will. And so, like, there is. The collapse of the Republican Party is sort of the third leg of undercutting the democracy. So that's when I say we feel alone. We feel alone because we counted on corporate America. We counted on leadership in civil society. We counted on the media to stand with us. And we thought there would be elements of the Republican Party that would at least put speed bumps in place, and none of those are there. Lee, it's you and me and your listeners. It's you and me and your viewers. It's a handful of others and some Democratic leaders, like I said, some governors, some members of Congress in the House and the Senate. But we are largely on our own, but we cannot back down.
- [14:47]
B
Yeah. I think what we have to remember, and you've said this, too, that it's not a small group who believe in these things that we believe. You know, there's tens of millions of people who voted for Kamala Harris who believed in hope and joy and the future of democratic America to help the regular people in America. The fact that that didn't transl to the voters doesn't mean that those people aren't there and they don't believe in those things. There's millions of people who didn't vote but believe in democracy and the rule of law. Like you mentioned, there's millions of people who voted for Trump who felt like the government was failing them in some way, but aren't gonna like what's coming. Right? And so we need to find a way to unite these people together. And in the article, I think you quite rightly said that you wish you had this solution. Right? But we're dealing with a bigger problem than one person can solve. And we can't just be sitting here waiting for a leader to come along and tell us what to do, because no leader is gonna come out of some smoky back room and be like, here's the plan. Right? That's what a lot of us are waiting for. People have often called you democracy's white knight, but you're saying, like, don't just look for me to come in on a white seat and be like, here's the plan. We have to look to ourselves. We're going into what you've called an illiberal time. Right. And to work against that, it's gonna be a group effort. It's gonna be a group effort from the elected leaders who have the honestly the balls to stand up the people in civil society that want to have a rule of law and don't wanna be in a dictator. Ordinary citizens, our community groups that are out here doing the work, all of us have this leadership role and what you call adopting an opposition mindset, which means not attacking each other, right. But supporting each other in opposition to the far bigger threat. And you have been very clear about this concept of opposition, an opposition movement not only to resist Trump in the short term, but to oppose MAGA and Trumpism for the long haul. That this is about much more than just the next four years. Right. Like you've explained that your problem with resistance is that it feels sort of temporary. Right. Like we just need to resist these people for say four years and wait them out. But you've been saying it's important to acknowledge that this dream that things are going to go back to normal is over, right? Like things are not going back to normal, which is why we need an opposition and not resistance. If resistance is about holding something off, opposition is about fighting back. Do you want to expand on that for me a little bit? It so I'm very sincere when I talk about my dog because I love him so very much. He is such a good boy and I hated how nervous he was over the past couple of weeks because of the fires here, because he was reading our energy and he was watching us pack our stuff up and feeling concerned that he was going to be left if we were going on a trip. And I kept telling him not to worry because if we had to leave he would be coming with us. But one of the things that was great when I started to think about packing the dog stuff was that chips now eats Sundays for dogs. Dogs Sundaes is not only a healthy dog food made from a short list of human grade ingredients co founded by a practicing veterinarian who tests and formulates every version of each recipe with 90% meat, 10% superfoods and 0% synthetic nutrients and artificial ingredients, but also it's incredibly easy to store and serve. So unlike other fresh dog foods, Sundae's doesn't require refrigeration or preparation because of their air dry drying process. So if you are going to be traveling with your dog, as I thought I was going to be, I was so grateful to have a dog food that didn't need a can opener or a scoop or refrigeration. Plus I already had a couple of bags of the chicken and beef flavor because the food is shipped right to our house, so it was just ready to go. Just another reason to love Sundays for dogs. So maybe the new year is not only the perfect time for humans to make healthy changes, but it's a good time for your pup as well. So you get 40% off a two week trial of Sundays by going to sundaysfordogs.com politicsgirl and using the code politicsgirl at checkout. You can cancel or pause your subscription at any time with 100% satisfaction guarantee. That is Sundays fourdogs.com politicsgirl or use the code politicsgirl at checkout. Their food really is fantastic. I wouldn't steer you wrong when it comes to our doggos. This episode of the Politics Girl podcast is brought to you by Wild Grain. You might have heard me talk about Wild Grain over the holidays. Wild Grain is the first bake from frozen subscription box for artisanal breads and pastries and pastas. Wild Grain boxes are fully customizable, so in addition to their classic variety box, they have a gluten free box and 100% vegan plant based box. Best of all, they take the hassle out of baking since all items baked from frozen in 25 minutes or less. These boxes are amazing. We made croissants over the holidays. Cookies. We had a baguette with our pasta. Just fresh baked goods from the freezer to the table. They're delicious and it's a real treat to have them at home whenever you want. Are you ready to bring all your favorite carbs right to your doorstep? Be sure to check out Wild Grain so you can begin building your own box of artisanal breads and pastas and pastries. For limited time, Wild Grain is offering our list listeners $30 off their first box plus free croissants in every box when you go to wildgrain.com politicsgirl to start a subscription. Yes, you heard me. That's free croissants in every box and $30 off your first box when you go to wildgrain.com politicsgirl that's wildgrain.com politicsgirl or you can use the promo code politicsgirl at checkout. So the other day I was standing around my bedroom trying to figure out how to make it nicer and Sean was on the bed on his phone and finally he looked up and he said, said, are you trying to get my attention? What are you doing over there. And here's the thing, I was turning in circles and talking to myself a little bit. So I get why he was confused. But with all the ugly in the world right now and all the sadness and fear around the fires, I've been spending my limited time online looking at bedrooms to get some inspiration, and I was in the zone. The thing that really needs attention in my room are the blinds. Which is why I'm happy to tell you about three Day Blinds, which I the leading manufacturer of custom window treatments in the US who make upgrading your blinds and shades and shutters and drapery easy, breezy and painless. If you're not handy, that's no problem. Their team handles all the heavy lifting, design, measurements, installation, and you just sit back and get your upgraded windows. You want help deciding what fits best in your home? Their professional design consultants, each with over 10 years of experience, will guide you to the perfect solution from the comfort of your home. Plus they'll give you a free no obligation quote the same day. Right now you can get a buy one get one 50% off deal on custom window treatments. So whether you're looking for modern motorized blinds that sync with your smart home or chic Roman shades that tie a room together, or like me, you're just looking to upgrade something a little better than you chose, say, 20 years ago. Three day blinds have thousands of options for every style and budget right now. Get quality window treatments that fit your budget with Three Day Blinds. Head to Three Day Blinds.com politicsgirl for their buy one, get one 50% off deal on custom blinds, shades, shutters and drapery for a free, no charge, no obligation consultation. Just head to threedayblinds.com politicsgirl one last time. That's buy one get one 50% off when you head to the 3D a yblinds.com politicsgirl maker make your windows work for you. It's 2025. It might be time for an upgrade. If resistance is about holding something off, opposition is about fighting back. Do you want to expand on that for me a little bit?
- [22:08]
A
Yeah, I really do. Because I think this is to me the most important concept right now that people in the center and center, left and left need to understand and embrace. There was an understanding in 2017 that we could resist the abnormal, right? We could resist Donald Trump, and that if that was successful, politics might snap back, right? You would have a Joe Biden on one side and then, you know, to use just a name, a Mitt Romney on the other, right? You would, you would restore back and so the resistance was all that was necessary. You just had to resist that. The fact is there's no snapping back. Like, and it's not just because Donald Trump won again. And the, you know, he won by a very small margin. Like, so, like, I'm not into the whole mandate thing, but, but it's part of what I was saying about the Republican Party. The Republican Party doesn't wish to go back to Mitt Romney. There is no Mitt Romney Republican Party constituency left. And so when it's not Donald Trump, it'll be J.D. vance or it'll be, by the way, Don Jr. Right. Or it'll be someone in that ilk. And so we on the left, we need to understand that we need to build an opposition movement to that. It is not, not that if we just hold off bad things, we'll all go back to normal. We need to understand we are in a new paradigm, we are in a new reality. And so what we need to do is to build an opposition that, number one, can win elections. And one of the things about winning elections is that we need to prioritize winning elections. And that means not having purity tests. It means, you know, I have no tolerance for people on the left going after people in the center left. I have no tolerance for people in the center left going after people on the left. If you are trying to pin blame for what happened or what might happen on another Democrat or then you are missing the point. Okay, the problem here is not within the Democratic coalition. The problem here is the Republican Party has turned into a illiberal party that supports Donald Trump without question. And so that's number one. Number two, we need to understand that going on CNN is not going to get your message out. This is not about finding the next Joe Rogan. This is about supporting independent media today. There are people like you who are out there every day doing the work of spreading, spreading the news that people need to hear. And by the way, you're who they're listening to. You are the people who people are. You are who people are tuning into. And so we need Democratic elected officials. We need progressive leadership. We need people to normalize that. This is where you go to get information and to share information. You know, President Biden did a final op ed and where did he put it? He put it in the Washington Post. And I just had to shake my head. I'm thinking, why on earth, of all the places you would publish, you know, why would you put it in the Washington Post? I mean, put it on the white House website. If you want, go and put it on a progressive substack, go on Politics Girls podcast and, like, announce it, right? Whatever it is, whatever it is, like, you're the President, United States. You're going to get coverage. Don't worry. Right? And like, and so, like, we need to make sure we have new ways of getting messages out, and we need new voices. And like, people like you have a huge audience because you are a different voice. You are not sitting in Washington, D.C. talking in acronyms. And so, you know, you're. Oftentimes I came across you and I loved you from the moment I saw you, because you were standing in a kitchen. You were talking, like, from people, literally about kitchen issues from the kitchen. And so we need to do that. And finally, we need to be open to new institutions and new policy ideas. We cannot just defend the same ideas because they've been the same ideas. We need to be willing to change. We need to be willing to adopt things that are working. And same with institutions. We need to understand there will be new institutions that rise and some old institutions will fall, some will transform themselves. This is a period of dynamic change. And it can be exciting. Exciting. It can be exciting, but it will be terrifying. And I understand, and I want to acknowledge this right now, people are terrified, and I understand why what we just saw take place with Donald Trump is terrifying. And people are understandably scared. But don't disengage. Don't disengage. Unsubscribe from the Washington Post. Subscribe to Politics, girl. You know, stop watching. Stop watching legacy media. Start watching her. Right? But don't disengage. Engage. Just engage in a new paradigm. And if we all do that, as you said, we won't be alone. But we won't be alone because we will build this new opposition movement that is not dependent on the institutions that have failed us. And frankly, we'll come up with some really good ideas moving forward.
- [26:42]
B
Yeah. Okay, well, let me just back up then and go through some of these ideas that you just mentioned in, in brevity there, because I feel like you've got kind of five main pillars to this opposition movement. And, and I'd love to back up and just sort of go through them so people sort of have a better sense of it. The first one you mentioned was win more elections, Right? And that feels like pretty self explanatory. Obviously, if Democrats want to, you know, oppose the Trump administration, they need to win more elections. But I don't think it's as obvious as it Sounds, I mean, obviously, considering the last election, but it's clearly not as easy as it sounds. And you've mentioned that we tend to organize around issues, but we have to remember that we're not going to get any of our issues addressed if we don't elect politicians to office. Right. So we have this divide between the Republican Party and the Democratic Party. Whatever version of it is progressive, centrist, you know, liberal, whatever that is so wide right now. It is so different. A state run by a Democratic governor or a state run by a Republican governor are night and day different. Right. Like how a Democratic mayor or a Republican mayor are going to rule on things around their state or their city is just completely dichotomous. And it's such a night and day difference that we need to be doing our business in the light. So we can't, as you said, be doing this purity test thing. We can't be beating up our own candidates. Like, we can't be dragging our own candidates down because they didn't check every box that we wanted them to. We have to kind of get serious about the fact that is this person closer to what I need them to do when this is the alternative over. So that's the first one, right?
- [28:15]
A
Yep, that's exactly.
- [28:16]
B
More elections.
- [28:17]
A
Yeah.
- [28:17]
B
Okay, so the second one, you're talking about expanding our thoughts, having different ideas, and you've talked about having a big tent of thoughts and ideas. What do you mean by that? I think that's also sort of a little purity testy as well. Less tone and thought policing. But when you talk about people being able to speak freely, what do you mean?
- [28:35]
A
Yeah. So, you know, I'll give you an example that actually was part of what got me thinking about this from your, from actually your state, California. Like California has a, a problem with housing. There is not enough housing. Housing is too expensive. And it. And I listened to a lot of people talk about why this is. And some people said it's because it's too expensive. Some people said it's a landlord problem, it's corporate buying of apartments. Some people said it's, it's land use rules. Some people said it's builder problem. And it occurred to me that like, you know, within the center left to further left, there are a lot of ideas and we need to be open to them. Like, I don't know what the right answer is to solve the housing problem. And I don't think anyone in California should think they have the solution to it because they're still a problem. So, like, we should be willing to say, like, okay, let's talk about, is it this problem or is it this problem? Is there a solution this way or that way? And that's just like one example in one state. But at the national level, you know, we have a lot of big problems that Democrats are trying to solve. Republicans are not trying to solve those problems. Republicans don't want government to work. We do want government to work, but we need to be willing to say, okay, I have one idea of how we can solve this problem. Someone else of good faith has a slightly different way or maybe a very different way. And we should not be saying, how dare you raise that as an idea. Let's have a big enough tent that we can discuss these things in good faith and try to move towards better ideas. That's how, you know, frankly, FDR got to Social Security, right? Like, he got there by having there be this debate within his administration, within his government. That is how Joe Biden passed so many historic bills. Right. It was a messy process, but it was a process that yielded some ideas this way, some ideas that way. And rather than criticizing that you don't like the other person's ideas and yours are better, I think the Democratic Party needs to be willing to think and entertain new ways of acting and people who are coming to that debate.
- [30:39]
B
Yeah, no, my husband speaks like that. I like to come to a table with my actual plan that's all organized. And he always says there's no bad ideas. Like, throw them all out on the wall and we'll see which ones work. Right. We need to be able to speak freely, to put our ideas on the table without being afraid of being canceled or ostracized. That's how we get new good ideas. It's also how we get bad ideas. But we can throw those bad ideas out if we don't like them, without people losing their minds and saying, like, how dare you say such a thing? Like, you're saying, there's lots of different ways to fix the housing crisis in California and some of them would work together and some of them won't work at all. But if we can't say them, then how we ever going to solve a problem? Because as you're saying, the alternative to what we're trying to oppose has no desire to fix it at all. Okay, so the third thing I think you've talked about is this institutional idea that the institutions themselves need to change, that the reality we face is not necessarily served by the institutions we're currently working with or the policies we're currently working with. And if there are parts of the government that don't work for the people anymore, be that institutions or policies, if they are dated, if they are obsolete, the question is why are we holding onto them so tightly? Is it because that's what the establishment likes? Is it because that's the way we've always done it? And is it that we need to start thinking out beyond that now? And you use the example of climate, right? That we have this crisis around the climate, which we clearly do, but if we need to build alternative ways to get that isn't so destructive, we might have to say, okay, we've worked with fossil fuels for a really long time and it's not meeting the moment. So we need to change. We need to really invest in a Green New Deal, that kind of thing. Now. I think the Republicans are actually pretty great at reimagining things much better than we are, right? They reimagined maga. They reimagined their communication structure that you and I were talking about, a way to get their message to the people well before we did. They invested in it. They now have this ridiculous Department of Government efficiency with Elon and Vivek just cutting stuff they don't like, right? These are not good ideas necessarily, but they definitely have moved and changed with the times to meet people where they are, at least drag the public along to where they want them to be. And you pointed out in an article you wrote recently that the Democratic Party used to be the party of change. But change doesn't always mean adding new things. Sometimes change can be taking away old things that no longer work. This podcast is sponsored by MDHearing. MDHearing makes high quality, easy to use rechargeable hearing aids with exceptional sound quality personalized to your hearing profile that cost a fraction of what typical hearing aids cost. In fact, mDhearing's Neo model costs over 90% less than clinic hearing aids. The NEO fits inside your ear, so no one will even know it's there. Plus, MD MDHearing just launched their Neo XS, MDHearing's smallest hearing aid ever. While everyone is out here making things more expensive, MDHearing recently cut their prices in half. You can now get their high quality digital hearing AIDS for only $297. MDHearing was founded by an ENT surgeon who saw how many of his patients needed hearing aids but couldn't afford them. He made it his mission to develop a quality hearing aid that anyone could afford, which is probably why MDHearing has sold over 2 million hearing aids and you can buy them with confidence because they offer a 45 day risk free trial with 100% money back guarantee. So get the high quality affordable hearing aids that you deserve with mDhearing. Go to shop mDhearing.com and use the promo code politicsgirl to get a pair of hearing aids for just $297 plus they're adding a free extra charging case a $100 value. You just for listeners of politics girl, that's shop mDhearing.comand use our promo code politicsgirl and get a pair of hearing aids for Just $297. So I love my coffee but some people do not. Some people are just super sensitive to caffeine and end up feeling jittery and off for the rest of the day if they have one. Which is why I am telling you about Mud Water. Mud Water Mudwarder is a fantastic coffee alternative made with a blend of organic functional mushrooms that keeps you sharp and energized. MudWTR's got ingredients like Lion's Mane, which supports focus and mental clarity Reishi which helps keep you calm and balanced. There's also Chaga for its antioxidant benefits and Cordyceps which boost your energy and stamina which is very helpful on those long work days. Their OG blend has a rich earthy flavor with hints of cacao and chai. You you can drink it hot or iced or use the frother mudWTR sends along to froth up some milk and drink it like a latte. No caffeine spikes or crashes, just steady, focused energy. Plus, every single ingredient in MUDWTR is 100% USDA certified organic, non GMO, gluten free, vegan and kosher. There's no sugar or artificial sweeteners, so it's just a clean, natural source of energy that doesn't mess with your system. Ready to make the switch to cleaner Energy? Head to mudwater.com and grab your starter kit today. Right now, our listeners get an exclusive deal up to 43% off your entire order plus free shipping and a free rechargeable frother when you use the Code politics girl. That's right, 43% off with the code politicsgirl@m u d w t r.com politicsgirl and after your purchase, they'll ask you how you found them. Please support the show and let them know we sent you. Keep your energy natural and refreshing all year long with Mud Water because life's too short for anything less than clean, delicious energy. But change doesn't always mean adding new things. Sometimes change can be taking away old things that no longer work.
- [36:16]
A
Yeah, that's exactly right. And, you know, look, this has been a hallmark of successful Democratic politics for years that we were the party of change. I mean, you know, Barack Obama ran on a campaign of hope and change. And change doesn't just mean adding. Change means changing. It sometimes means subtracting. It sometimes means altering. And we need to do that. We need to be more outcome focused. You know, the fact is, at the end of the day, to use my example, in California, what people need is more housing. It is not about what institution exists in the California government. It's whether or not that institution is helping them build more housing. And, you know, Bill Clinton came into office in the early 1990s, and Al Gore actually headed an effort to reinvent government, which involved exactly this. Barack Obama took this on when he came into government. And actually, I think not enough credit is given to Joe Biden's administration for actually trying to change up a lot of things. I mean, he has made huge changes to government around American infrastructure, around investing in an industrial base, around climate. There's been a lot of change that's been made. And I think that the problem is sometimes we don't like to talk about it in those terms anymore. We used to love to talk about it in terms of change. Now we don't want to talk about a change. It's changed. We try to act like we're just adding. And I think that that's a mistake. And it's both true with policy and government. It's also true with institutions. If we have organizations or institutions that just aren't serving the needs of voters or of. Of the American public, like the fact that they exist isn't a reason for them to continue to exist. We need to invest in things that matter to people in their lives.
- [37:50]
B
Yeah, yeah. No, I think if we had gotten everything that was in the original build back better bill that Biden put out with paid family leave and affordable childcare and all these things that people actually need, it made a huge difference. But the Republicans deliberately got in the way of that because the last thing they need to see is government working. Right? Their whole thing is government doesn't work and we should privatize everything so a couple of us make more money. Right? So this isn't about waiting. It's about building. Right? Building a new electoral structure, building new strengths for our party, building out our power in the states, which I think is very important, because I think we need to acknowledge that that is what the Republicans did, right? That when they felt out of power in the federal government, they went to the states and they took over the state legislature. We see how much power those state legislatures have and how much power the Republicans have to get things done. How much power they have just holding that many states when it comes to the electoral college, when it comes to if they even wanted to change the Constitution, that kind of thing. I think we as a country need to acknowledge that the Republican Party we know is never coming back. Right? This is who they are now. And we need to build, as you're saying, this opposition for a future that acknowledges that, that we are the opposition to an extremist party, an extremist party called MAGA that's filled with Christ nationalists and white nationalists and a party that will put our country in danger by doing things like green lighting completely inept cabinet members simply because they will say yes to the leader no matter what he asks. Right. So then that brings me to your communications model. If we want people to understand that if we want people to be listening to people, not just me, there's lots of people out there, but we haven't invested in people like us. I keep saying with the Joe Rogan thing, we don't need a Joe Rogan. We need people to invest in the people that are already doing the work. So they us seriously like Joe Rogan. Because one of the reasons Joe Rogan is Joe Rogan isn't because he's so brilliant. The guy doesn't even prepare. It's because somebody gave him $125 million to do the job. If you gave me $125 million, people are like, oh, I guess she's pretty smart. We should listen to her, right? Like someone paid her a lot of money to do it, right? So I think we have to invest in the people that we're doing. And you've said that like it's really important that we move forward, forward with this new communications model that, that we aren't building just for 2026 election or the 2028 election. We're not thinking a four year thing, a two year thing. We have to build 10, 20 years out. And part of that is explaining where we want to go to people in a way that they can hear it, right? Like this is really essential. I think legacy media got really arrogant. But it goes back to what you were saying about three people that let us down. It was like corporations, the media, the Republican Party. But like you're saying corporations and the media are the same thing now, right? They're not. The fourth is estate. They are part of the business community that just wants to do well financially in a capitalistic society.
- [40:41]
A
That I think is the big takeaway from the last two and a half months. Like even since I started writing about this, this is the thing that has become most clear to me, that I think is most clear to everyone. The assumption was that we needed to trust and embrace and, and promote legacy media because they would have the heft and only they would have the heft to take on a Donald Trump, to have the resources against threats that Donald Trump might make, that, you know, to cover all of his foibles and that the problem with, you know, frankly, people like you is that you would be intimidated and you'd have to back down because you were. You didn't have all of that heft and resources. And it turns out that was entirely, entirely wrong. It turns out actually it is precisely because those large media organizations are owned by multinational corporations or by diversified corporations that they actually can't afford to stand up to Donald Trump. They can't afford to have their theme parks boycotted, they can't afford to have their licenses to their local broadcast stations denied. They can't afford to have their rockets not contracted with their server space not used, not to be a government contractor. They can't afford, afford any of those things. And so they are the first ones to bow down. They're the first ones to, to bend a knee. They are the first ones to accommodate a Donald Trump because they can't afford not to. And it turns out that whether it's you or it's Democracy Docker, which I run, we actually can afford to. We don't. We. Democracy Doc is not looking to curry favor with Donald Trump. You are not looking for a government contract with, with NASA. You're, you know, like, like we all actually can be the.
- [42:33]
B
Yeah, no one's stealing my million dollar paycheck.
- [42:36]
A
Correct, Exactly.
- [42:37]
B
I don't have four houses in the Hamptons I have to keep paying my mortgage on.
- [42:40]
A
Yeah, so you have to keep. So, like, so what we need to do, if we are going to have a successful opposition movement, we need to promote these independent voices because honestly, that's how a Joe Rogan or the others get powerful or Ben Shapiro or, you.
- [42:56]
B
Know, Candace Owens or Charlie Kirk or the Daily Wire. Yeah, yeah.
- [43:01]
A
Because they also built a movement or a media strategy on the idea that honestly, they don't need anything from politicians. They are just, they're able to deliver their messages and they're able to promote a rabidly terrible version of Republican magism. But, you know, but just as that could be a force for bad, it could be a force for good. But we need people on our side to understand, understand it. And by the way, I, you know, and I say this to Democrat candidates and office soldiers all the time. It's also good for them. I mean, the fact is, if they go on Fareed Zakaria, like, and I, by the way, watch Fareed Zakaria, so I feel bad, like, picking on him. But like, me and 60,000 other people are watching Fareed Zakaria, and none of those people are persuadable voters. And none of those people are, are, are getting, you know, anything that's going to engage them in volunteerism or excited about candidates. Whereas if they go on your show or they read democracy docket, they get good news, they get good information, they get accurate, you know, what's going on in the. But they also get a little bit more, they get inspiration about why it is this fight matters to them. And so I just think that this is an essential part of building a new opposition.
- [44:10]
B
Yeah. Plus we have like four to ten times the audience.
- [44:14]
A
Correct. That's where the people are, and that's the biggest thing.
- [44:17]
B
Yeah. So listen, finally, you've said the Democrats shouldn't be afraid to use the courts to oppose Trump. And I agree with this. But I think I need you to expand on it, because for a lot of us, with the Supreme Court the way it is, I think a lot of people are feeling like the courts are lost. Lost to us.
- [44:32]
A
Yeah. The courts are not lost to us. Look, we rightfully all celebrated that one of Joe Biden's legacies was appointing a record number of federal judges. Okay, he did. And here's what I want everyone to understand is that the US Supreme Court is not our friend. There is no question about that. The US Supreme Court, though, only hears between 60 and 70 cases a year. There are millions of lawsuits filed every year. There are hundreds of thousands that go up to the federal courts, to the courts of appeals. And Joe Biden has his legacy. Will, will be, among other things, having changed the nature and the complexion of a lot of those courts, both literally and figuratively. And so the truth is, when we fight in court, we have been winning. You know, in this last election, Republicans engaged in efforts to try to subvert the election and to suppress the vote. And we sued and we won. They tried to gerrymander. And the fact is, as we are recording this. There is a African American member of Congress from Alabama that exists solely because of a lawsuit that was brought and was won for the first time since the Civil Rights Act. There are now two African Americans representing the voters in the state of Alabama. And that's the result of court victories. And so we cannot give up on the courts. You know, Republicans are going to control the executive branch. They control both houses of Congress. We cannot give up on the federal courts. And also, there are great state courts around this country. You know, look at my law firm and I, we. We reinstated dropboxes in Wisconsin due to the bringing case that went up to the Wisconsin State Supreme Court. So please don't give up on the courts. But we have to be willing to use them, and we have to be willing to use them aggressively. You know, Donald Trump already has done some terror, terrible things just in the short term that he. In the short time that he has been reelected president through executive orders.
- [46:09]
B
I know he's not. He wasn't even in power yet, and he was, like, getting people to do what he wants.
- [46:13]
A
Executive orders are now being challenged in court by lawyers who are going to try to protect immigration, try to protect people who are being targeted, you know, the federal workforce. And so we cannot give up on the courts.
- [46:25]
B
Yeah. But also, like you said, the Republicans and the right wing, they use every legal tool available to them. We have to stop acting like little good boys and girls who don't want to rock the boat when the other side is drilling holes in the hull of our ship. Right. Like, we have to stop doing that. We're not gonna give up on the idea that we can win in court, because we can win in court. But we do need to acknowledge that the Supreme Court is deeply compromised. You know, we have to, like, look to the lower court system and the amount of justices and judges that Joe Biden was able to get in, because it doesn't mean we can't fight in the judiciary. I mean, ultimately, you've said that we're dealing a lot right now with anticipatory obedience, or what Timothy Snyder calls obeying in advance. Right. Just people and leaders and institutions bowing down to this wannabe dictator before they're even asked. You were saying at the beginning of this episode, you know, these people that would otherwise be strutting around America telling us they're the most important people in the country crumbled at the first sign of pressure. Right. They're getting in their private jets, they're going down to Mar a Lago, they're telling Donald Trump what a very special boy he is. Right? We can't do that. Like you and I and everyone else out here that isn't waiting for our contract, our government contract. We're currently, as you said, more powerful than Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg. Because we're free to say, this is fucking wrong and you're an asshole and we're not doing this this way. And I think it's really important that we keep reminding ourselves that we're not helpless and hopeless and alone, because there really are so many of us. I feel like ultimately you're saying, I know who I am. I know what I'm gonna do. You're saying, democracy docket itself is not gonna obey or bow down. Democracy docket is gonna stay independent news and an independ, not be beholden to billionaires or venture capitalists or any sort of private equity. And our success, your success, my success, people like Brian Tyler Cohen, people who are out here doing the work, the Bulwark Lincoln Project, those kind of people, our rise and fall will happen on people thinking that we actually give them a quality product, that they care about the country. They want to help us out, they want to listen to us. And I think that that's very important because it gives us way more power than it feels like we have. So if people. People are listening to you right now and they're like, geez, I really do need to support Mark and his work and, and all the legal work he's doing moving forward and all the information he's giving us. How do they follow you to keep your. What I think is a noble mission going? How do they do that?
- [48:43]
A
Look, I mean, obviously they can go to Democracy Document, they can subscribe there, and that's. But I'd also ask you, you know, I periodically put out lists and I'll put out more, you know, support independent media across the board, you know. You know, I certainly want them to support you and the work you're doing. I want them to support. You mentioned Brian Tyler Cohn, a great example.
- [49:02]
B
You.
- [49:02]
A
I know you're in an organization called Chorus that is. That is like helping incubate this across the board. Like, it's not the mis. The thing that I find so frustrating when people say that there needs to be a Joe Rogan on the left. First of all, you can't just, like, invent a person.
- [49:19]
B
No, it's so reactionary.
- [49:21]
A
But also, Donald Trump didn't win because there was a Joe Rogan as You say there was a Charlie Kirk, there was a Steve Bannon, there was a Turning Point usa. There was a people who I, you know, I hear their names and then I learn more about them and I'm like, Like, it's wild. Like, we need a progressive infrastructure. We need an independent media and messaging infrastructure. And so people need to support all of it. And so democracy docket is my contribution to that. But it is not by far and away the only one or even the most important.
- [49:53]
B
Well, I think it's pretty important. I want to thank you for joining us today, Mark. I mean, as the people with the loudest microphones right now on legacy media are kind of turning them down or worse, changing what they say to better please the future leader. I'm really very, very pleased to know that there are people like you out here willing to make up the opposition, because it's going to take all of us. And I don't want us to think our country is over. We're just playing by a completely new set of rules and we need to toughen up and fast.
- [50:21]
A
Amen.
- [50:23]
B
So that was Mark Elias reminding us that we are in a new pace paradigm, a period of dynamic change, which is understandably scary, but can also be exciting if we capitalize on the potential. There has been an utter collapse of the business community, the legacy media, and the Republican Party. And the faster we move past our feelings of nostalgia for the America that was and create a working opposition party that acknowledges the America that is, the better off we'll be. We can't wait for a savior to ride in and tell us we what to do or beat up on the leaders who do arrive for not being perfect enough. Surviving this and building something better is going to take all of us. But we need to get ourselves into the opposition mindset. This. No, no way, we're not doing that. Not on my watch kind of thing. The American people who still believe in truth and fairness, democracy and the rule of law have to stick together because there are more of us out here than you think. I want to thank Mark for joining us today and you for caring enough about this country to be here. Now. Take a deep breath and remember who you are. Until next week. PG Act. Before you go, I just want to say, if you're a premium member of this podcast, thank you. And if you're not a member, please consider supporting my work. As Mark said, the rise of new messaging is essential in this political landscape. The mainstream media is no longer a reliable source of information and the right way extremists already have an incredible advantage because their side invested in messaging well before we did. So if you aren't a member of Politics Girl Premium, please consider going to politicsgirl.com and signing up. The beauty of supporting me is that you will get this podcast ad free, along with all of my short rants sent directly to your inbox. So even if my work is silenced on social media, you will still get access to the truth. There is a link to sign up in the bio of this episode, but also@politicsgirl.com and as always, please like and share this podcast so we can grow our audience to reach more people who seek the truth amongst the lies. Thank you again for all your time and support. The Politics Girl Podcast is written and performed by me, Lee McGowan, in partnership with the Midas Media Network, and produced and edited by Happy Warrior Entertainment. All rights reserved.