Loading summary
Transcript142 lines
- [00:01]
Sponsor Ad
This episode is brought to you by Meundies Underwear. Drawers are like the Wild West. You never know what you're gonna pull out or what shape it's in. So upgrade your collection with the buttery, soft comfort of Meundies. Meundies signature fabric is as soft as a warm hug from your favorite sweater. Plus, it's breathable and, oh, so comfy, making it ideal for all day wear. Get 20% off your first order, plus free shipping@meundies.com Spotify with code Spotify. That's meundies.com Spotify. Code Spotify.
- [00:30]
Ro Khanna
I think that what Donald Trump has done is defeated the establishments of both parties. And I say, look, Trump, Trump took over the Republican Party in a matter of years. I mean, I remember talking to Kevin McCarthy after January 6th, and I said, you know, Kevin, I think Trump may still be your nominee. He said, oh, he's done no way. Never. And so what Trump shows is that people dislike the status quo. They're frustrated with a lot of the forces of globalization and the forces that took away their livelihoods and their dignity. Dignity. And they're looking for a new approach in both parties.
- [01:13]
Dave Rubin
All right, Congressman Ro Khanna, I have to say I'm going to repeat what I just said to you privately. I'm very, very happy to have you here and have this opportunity to chat with you because I can't get many Democrats to talk to me, and I don't get that. Yeah. Do I seem scary to you?
- [01:28]
Ro Khanna
You look fine so far. I'll let you know at the end of the interview. But, you know, I mean, our country was founded on spirited debate, clash of ideas. I just don't get why we've all been in our own silo. So I appreciate your having me on.
- [01:42]
Dave Rubin
Yeah, well, look, I often talk about you on the show, and I say you're on my kind of short list of sane Democrats. I do obviously want to do a little autopsy on what has happened to the Democrat Party. I was a Democrat for most of my life. The last two Democrats, we did a little digging before you came in. The last two Democrats I've had on my show were Bobby Kennedy, who ran as a Democrat, no longer a Democrat, and Tulsi Gabbard, who only, who only.
- [02:10]
Ro Khanna
Four years ago was ran a Bernie Sanders supporter.
- [02:12]
Dave Rubin
Right. And now Bernie's not too thrilled with her. So to that point, what is. Let's do the broad stuff first, and then we'll get into some of the specifics. What is going on with the Democrat Party at the Moment, for some reason.
- [02:25]
Ro Khanna
We have become the party of defending institutions in the status quo, and we got painted as the party of military interventionism and war. Both are a mistake. We have to recognize that people are really angry, righteously angry at what's happened in this country for the last 50 years. Their jobs snatched from them, offshoring the decline of the working and middle class, and a foreign policy blob that has gotten us into a lot of overseas wars that weren't in the American interest. And so the single biggest problem of the Democratic Party is we can't be the party of the status quo. We've got to be a party of change and transformation.
- [03:08]
Dave Rubin
So how did that happen then? Because even. And we'll dive into what's going on right now, literally just blocks from us, where, you know, right now Elon Musk and Donald Trump and this administration are.
- [03:18]
Sponsor Ad
Trying to, just as I see it.
- [03:20]
Dave Rubin
Open the books and figure out what's going on with our spending. And you've got Democrats outside of these buildings saying, basically, no, don't go in there, don't look, and have no idea what, what's happening with our government.
- [03:31]
Ro Khanna
Well, look, I was one of the Democrats, and I've known Elon for many, many years. I was one of the Democrats when he was appointed, who said, okay, if you're going to expose wasteful spending, if you're going to expose the projects that we shouldn't have and have more competition, fine, let's work on that. But start with the Department of defense. That's 56% of the federal budget, where Elon and I have parted and had a conflict is on the Constitution, and we can get into it.
- [03:57]
Dave Rubin
Sure.
- [03:58]
Ro Khanna
I think, okay, if he's got all of this exposing sunlight, why not just come to Congress, force us to take up or down votes? You know, if he thinks that $50 million is going for reproductive care or something, say, kind of vote on it, up or down. Why is it.
- [04:11]
Dave Rubin
But what is it. What is it that you have to vote on? I mean, we are, at least from what I understand, at the USAID portion of this. I mean, these are real numbers. What does he have to go to Congress for to figure out that?
- [04:21]
Ro Khanna
Well, he's got to go to con Congress to say, if you've appropriated something, if we already have laws saying that we're spending this money and he wants to have that money cut, he should come to Congress and say, look, here are the places that the spending is wasteful and vote on it. And if I vote for that wasteful spending. It will put me, my constituents will hold me accountable. But I think the problem people have right now is there's this sense that he's going to be making these decisions unilaterally.
- [04:55]
Dave Rubin
So do you agree with what they've basically exposed that the spending is somewhat ridiculous?
- [05:01]
Ro Khanna
I agree that they've exposed certain things that have been wasteful, but I don't think they've taken on the whole the, the, the, the holy grails or the, the big items yet. I mean the most of the USAID we can discuss what, what should or shouldn't be in there. But the vast majority of spending, as you know, in the federal government is the Department of defense. Right. 56% of discretionary spending. I'm waiting to see what they.
- [05:24]
Dave Rubin
But is the argument that you think that they won't come up with anything there or that you just don't like the order that they're doing it in? I've heard some other Democrats say that basically like you should go to defense first. I mean to me they're dealing with some of the easy stuff first that we don't need to be funding, you know, trans comic books in Peru, which quite literally USAID was doing. And then you get to it. So is it just a, is it really an ordering issue for you?
- [05:46]
Ro Khanna
Well, look, it's a, it's a question of what are they, are they just going after things that are low hanging fruit on politics? Are they actually going to go after the place where there's most wasteful spending? But I give them, look, they won the election. They get to decide what they go and expose first in the order. My problem is the constitutionality of it, which is okay, you're coming up with these findings, have the confidence to come to the American public, go in front of our oversight committee or whatever committees, share your findings, tell Johnson, you have Johnson as the speaker to have up or down votes and all of this.
- [06:22]
Dave Rubin
Sure. So is that not what you think ultimately will happen here going forward? That they'll expose this stuff first and that that will inherently make Congress tighten the belt on some of these things and not do them going forward?
- [06:34]
Ro Khanna
I think what spooked people is the, the stopping or pausing of, of payments. I mean what really got the country in my view upset was when they had for a few hours like they, the, the portals on Medicaid funding stopped. Now I'm not a sensationalist, they, they re open those portals and right now, you know, the Democrats need to be careful on what's actually happening and not just make up sensational things, but they have paused certain types of funding. They paused, for example, the NIH grants, not the direct cancer research, but the funding for the infrastructure to do that research. Those are things that they need to come to Congress for. For example, in the nih, I would vote for the funding of helping the clinician who's doing research have his electricity and infrastructure paid for. Now, if Musk wants to argue why that shouldn't be the case, make that argument in Congress, sure.
- [07:26]
Dave Rubin
So is, is the argument really that what they are doing now is unconstitutional? Is that, is that really what the argument is?
- [07:33]
Ro Khanna
That is my, that is my contention.
- [07:35]
Dave Rubin
Is that it's unconstitutional.
- [07:36]
Ro Khanna
In fairness, there are conservatives who believe that the, that, that the Constitution, that Congress's power is simply to set a maximum level. Right. And my counterargument to that is imagine you had Barbara Lee become president from, from California and we, you know, she believes you should have 50% spending on the Pentagon. Now she's president. Congress has a $900 billion Pentagon budget and Barbara Lee says, okay, I only want to spend 300 billion of it. I think there would be outrage in this country. So Congress, in my view, doesn't just have the power to set the mandate maximums, it has the power of the purse. And this will go to the Supreme Court.
- [08:15]
Dave Rubin
Guys.
- [08:15]
Sponsor Ad
I started this show to uncover what's really going on in the world. But now that Trump is back in office, we can expect more agenda driven narratives and outright manipulation from the mainstream media. That's why I've partnered with Ground News. Unlike other platforms, Ground News doesn't publish stories or push narratives. Instead, it's an independent app and website that aggregates every source on a story so you can compare coverage and see through the media spin. It's easy to use swipe through the coverage tag to show whether it's driven by liberal corporations or independent conservative voices. My favorite feature is their Blind Spot feed, which highlights important stories the left and right aren't covering. It's a game changer for building trust and transparency in the media. I use Ground News to ensure that I'm providing my viewers with reliable, unbiased information. And now you can too, for a limited time, get their unlimited access vantage plan for nearly 40% off. Just go to Ground News Rubin or scan the QR code to subscribe. Supporting Ground News doesn't just give you the tools to think freely. It also supports independent voices like mine. Ground news Rubin get 40% off today.
- [09:21]
Dave Rubin
So when I see some of your other colleagues or Some of the people in the Senate, so Elizabeth Warren or Bernie, and they're outside USAID and they're, they're the optics of it, I think are they don't want anyone to see what the government is doing. From what I understand, you're basically saying it's okay to open up the books and look at all of this stuff, but then bring it to us and we will deal with the spending accordingly. So this is again where I think the Democrats, because they're so hysterical so often if there's a constitutional issue to be fought here, your position makes sense to me where there's, they seemingly want to hide all of what we're exposing right now.
- [09:56]
Ro Khanna
Well, this is why initially and I got criticism from my own party when I said that there is waste in government, that we shouldn't be the party that says we are for all government spending. I'm a progressive. I want to expand certain government funding. It's more important for me to be able to convince the American public that that funding is not, is going to be effective. And so I'm all. That's why I initially expressed a willingness to work together. It's the pausing of payments that really had me break and express concern. If they want to come to Congress and they want to expose things, fine. I mean that's, that's, that, that that's helpful to have more transparency.
- [10:39]
Dave Rubin
Yeah. I think the basic argument on the other side and I'm trying, I'm trying to do, I'm trying to do this as a fair interviewer and also people know my opinions on all of these things. But I brought you in to hear your opinions. I think the counterargument to all of that in essence would be this thing is so broken, it's so obviously wasteful. It's so deeply corrupt, it's so across every institution that there is no way to break it properly in like the most proper way where I think you're looking for something a little more nuanced that maybe is not real politic or something like that.
- [11:12]
Ro Khanna
Sure. That's the argument that people make say, saying, well, Musk would say I didn't come to Washington to do a report to Congress and Congress hasn't been able to get this wasteful spending under control for four years. Though the Clinton administration, the Clinton presidency did cut a fair amount of federal civil servants in the reinventing government. But the point is the Constitution matters. The Constitution is sacred. That's what makes us different from China or Russia or other countries. And I have more faith in the American public. I have faith that if you come with some of these crazy spending programs that, that aren't effective and you force members of Congress to vote on them, that you would, you would get more effective government.
- [11:57]
Dave Rubin
Yeah, it's interesting. I just have no faith in Congress. You know what I mean? Like, and I think that that's what most people feel right now, that they say, yeah, now, now I'm not speaking to the constitutionality of it. That will be for the courts to work out. Are they technically allowed to do this? But I think the average person thinks that no much, no matter how much would be exposed, no matter how much nonsense would be exposed, that Congress would just keep it going. And I think that that's the feeling right now when they see these Maxine Waters and everybody else yelling, screaming out there, protecting these things that are just throwing our money away.
- [12:26]
Ro Khanna
I agree with you that there is a feeling of Congress being broken and that's what they're appealing to. And that's why Trump's numbers still haven't, haven't fallen, because people say, oh, he's doing things. But there's a deeper principle which I do think at some point will backfire, and that is as soon as you have a stop of payment that's for something people really want or really like, they're going to say, well, who made that decision? And so my view is actually they'd be more effective if they were able to make the argument to the, to the American people and have the votes.
- [13:00]
Dave Rubin
So you describe yourself as a, as a progressive. I was a progressive. I was on the Young Turks Network. I mean, I definitely, I was definitely part of that thing. I describe myself now, I still believe that I'm a classical liberal, but I think liberals and progressives have very little to do with each other.
- [13:19]
Ro Khanna
Interesting.
- [13:19]
Dave Rubin
Unfortunately, I think that the old school liberal, I think someone like JFK would be a, in essence, a modern Republican. I think he would be a Trump like, Republican now and would not like what the Democrat Party has turned into. Part of that is that I, I, at this point, I don't think, certainly.
- [13:35]
Ro Khanna
Not on USA though, because John F. Kennedy, well, he started usa, started it.
- [13:38]
Dave Rubin
But I don't think he wanted this radical lack of transparency that we've had throughout, throughout the agency. But, but that aside for a moment, do you see this tension, I mean, when you're walking around Congress, do you see this tension between the more progressive wing and sort of the woke wing versus whoever might be kind of an old school liberal at this point? And by the way, I don't think there are many. Maybe, I mean, maybe Fetterman. I don't know who else is left, really.
- [14:04]
Ro Khanna
I'll tell you where we've got to get back to classical liberalism, and that is that we've got to have more exchanges of ideas, not be judgmental of people who have a different cultural or social viewpoint. Recognize that you can't cancel people or police language or tell people exactly how they should express themselves and be more willing to mix it up and have argument and have real debate. And to me, if there's one challenge the Democratic Party is, has had, is sometimes we came off as condescending or unwilling to debate people on the merits of the idea, and we just throw out labels. And that ultimately is not persuasive. And so you can have a progressive politics, which are, in my view, are based on the vast income inequality and lack of economic opportunity for people. But we have to be willing to debate the idea.
- [15:03]
Dave Rubin
Right? So, okay, so let's, let's debate some of those ideas. So vast income inequality. I mean, people seem to be upset that a billionaire is now trying to make government more efficient. You're up in Silicon Valley.
- [15:13]
Sponsor Ad
You have a lot of the billionaires.
- [15:14]
Dave Rubin
Who are, who were standing behind Donald Trump that day, to me, bringing in people who are innovators, who are job creators, who are literally, you know, paving the roads to new industries and AI and all of these things. And people know I'm a big sci fi guy, so I'm always worried about AI too. But the point is, we're in this technological revolution. I like having all of these people as part of the government. I think they create jobs and create wealth and all of these things. And it seems to me that the progressive view is, oh, if you have something, if you've created or you have money, you're automatically bad. Which is why Bernie keeps. They keep bringing up billionaire over and over again.
- [15:50]
Ro Khanna
No, I don't think. Well, certainly my view is not that wealth generation is bad. And I have not said let's outlaw billionaires. What I have said is that there are a lot of people in this country who have been left out. Why? Because jobs went offshore, partly of trade policy at factories, hollowed out. You had a lot of private equity come in and they liquidated these companies for dividends. You had them engage in stock buybacks. You have lower corporate tax rates overseas. And I am for a government that's going to rebuild factories in America, that's going to rebuild places like Johnstown and Milwaukee and if you want to have some business leaders involved in that reconstruction, I'm fine with it, but I'm not. What I don't want is business leaders dismantling important institutions of government that are there for the working and middle class.
- [16:40]
Dave Rubin
Right. So, again, I think, I think the. Our main disconnect seems to be you think that those institutions are important, and I, and I don't. I think that's probably, for the most part, we might, if we sat with every institution, we might be able to whittle to that. But, but some of what you just said, you must agree with Trump on then, on, on redoing some of these trade policies and getting some of.
- [16:59]
Ro Khanna
I agree with a lot of his diagnosis that we made a colossal mistake in this country of letting stealing aluminum manufacturing lead. I agree with him that NAFTA was a mistake. I agree with him that allowing China into the World Trade Organization was a mistake. I agree with him on what he's done on the tariffs on steel and aluminum recently. Where I disagree with him is that that's sufficient. I, I think you need federal financing to help build these new factories. I think you need an investment in the workforce. I think you need directed economic investment in communities left out. Rubio and I have, have a bill on this, actually, to use the federal government to. And that's how we built from Hamilton to Lincoln to fdr. And my view is that Trump's prescription is incomplete.
- [17:44]
Dave Rubin
Do you think it's possible that we just don't need government as much as we used to? That now because of technology, because of the way we live and the ability to travel more and the size of the country that maybe a hundred years ago, as we were going through our industrial revolution, we needed the government to do an awful lot. And there's just ways now to do things that the government is not particularly good at. And that might be some of the tension we're seeing right now.
- [18:11]
Ro Khanna
I think for certain types of innovation, you may not need government as much in terms of the development of AI and the development of quantum computing. A lot of that innovation is happening in the private sector. But where you do need government is to scale factories, to scale production. That's huge capital costs, and those are not often used borne by venture capitalists in the private sector. What you do need government for is the uses of AI. Are we going to use AI to cure disease? Are we just going to use it for the next chat box? Where you do need government, in my view, is to make sure everyone has health care and has decent public schools. So I am a big believer that a lot of innovation is taking place. Technology is taking place in the private sector. 85% of jobs are in the private sector. But if we're going to compete with China, we need a strong, smart government. Not a communist government like China, but a smart, strategic government.
- [19:04]
Sponsor Ad
We've been told our whole lives that wrinkle creams were the easiest way to look younger. Now, one doctor says that's nothing but old News. According to Dr. John Lake, the world renowned Beverly Hills beauty expert, most wrinkle fixes on the market are nothing but glorified moisturizers. They hardly make a dent on your appearance and some can even be harmful to your skin, he said. Recently, Dr. Lake has focused his attention away from mainstream cosmetic practices. Why? So he can pursue a revolutionary anti aging breakthrough, one that some experts say could empty the wallets of the cosmetic industry. It's almost like Photoshop for your face. You may even be mad after seeing how easy it is to visibly erase your wrinkles from view, lake told reporters. His personal clients have dubbed his new do it yourself technique the Age Rewinder Method, because it can take years or even decades off your appearance in under two minutes. In light of this amazing breakthrough, Dr. Lake has released a step by step video to the public, free and uninterrupted, where he outlines exactly how to use this simple solution from home. You can find out more about this yourself right now. Go to bhmd1.com rubin or click the link in the description box below. That's bhmd1.com Rubin again. Go watch the video at bhmd1.com Rubin right now or just click the link.
- [20:17]
Dave Rubin
In the description box below. So where are you at on schooling? I'm actually not totally sure. Are you, are you for school choice? I mean, we're seeing the Department of Education kind of be hacked away at the moment. Again, I'm completely fine with that. Where do you fall when it comes to public?
- [20:34]
Ro Khanna
Because you just mentioned I'm not for, for, for, for, for school choice. But let me answer on the Department of Education first. Then we can debate school choice.
- [20:41]
Dave Rubin
Sure.
- [20:41]
Ro Khanna
When you say that you want the Department of Education eliminated, are you talking about the funding in the Education Department or something else? Because there's funding that goes, for example, to schools in working class neighborhoods under Title 1. There's funding that goes to families who have kids with special needs. There's funding that goes to Pell Grants for working class kids who want to go to college or vocational school. Would you keep that funding or not?
- [21:05]
Dave Rubin
Well, first, I would say you really do have to look at all of it appropriately, which is what we're doing right now. Because just saying we're funding something doesn't mean that the money's being used appropriately or anything else. So that I think we would agree on that part. So that would be the first part. The second part I would say is I don't know that it needs to be done at the federal level. I think that that's what most people are realizing right now, that if I happen to live in Florida, we have an extremely good, you know, we have no state income tax, extremely good schools, which it used to be the joke of the country, Florida, because it was all the old people who weren't paying taxes and the schools weren't good. But DeSantis has largely changed that. I think the more you do things at local levels and remove the bureaucracy here, the better things will be for people. Well, so I don't think that there should. I wouldn't make the argument that you should have no directive. You could have a basic directive from the federal government that there are basic things we should be trying to teach, but I think they should be guidelines for the states more than forcing everybody to have one type of education. But I would like to talk about the school choice thing as well.
- [22:00]
Ro Khanna
Sure, but, but we need federal funding, right? I mean, first of all, I don't know how much Florida. My guess is Florida has a lot of schools and working class neighborhoods that also get federal funds. But Florida is a fairly rich state. You know, a lot of people from Silicon Valley, after they make their money or New York or other places go there, the Naples. You know, I go down to Florida, I say, what do they do? And they just say, no, they have money or something they all come to for the warm weather. So. But what about states that aren't as, as, as wealthy? You need federal funding. And in, in, in the whole Department of Education, funding is maybe 3, 4% of the, the federal budget. To me, that's an investment in our human potential. I'm a product of public schools. I went to a great public school. I'm sure they benefited in ways from funding from different streams. And to me, that's such a product of American democracy. Now, the school choice, I want to hear your opinion. That the challenge I have with it is 90% of, of, of kids in this country go to public school. And I am for charter schools within public schools. I'm for having competition within public schools. What I don't What I have a problem with is when tax dollars get sucked out of the competition within public schools and go to, to, to private schools, then I think you're hurting the other 90% have the competition within public schools.
- [23:22]
Dave Rubin
Right. I would very big on school choice and we have twin two year olds that I'm not sure where, where they're going to go or anything else. I think it likely will be homeschooled or pot or something like that, despite the good schools in Florida. But I would be much more for just a tax credit to parents to decide whether it's going to be the public. You know, if the public school is no good, then don't send them to the public school and then everyone has to make their choices accordingly. And then you do either the charter school or the private school or, or whatever else. But do you mind if I ask.
- [23:49]
Sponsor Ad
How old you are?
- [23:50]
Ro Khanna
I'm 48.
- [23:51]
Dave Rubin
You're 48. So I'm 48. I was gonna say, I think, I think we're about the same age and it's interesting because you said that you're a product of public schools. I am as well. All my schools I went to SUNY Binghamton for college, State University of New York and my elementary school, junior high, high school, all public schools. And I think, and when I heard you say that, that's why I was asking your age is. I think things worked basically if you're our age, if you're Gen X, and I think that's partly why Elon is involved in this now. The Gen X people were the last generation that the system basically worked. We didn't get taught crazy things. And did you get taught. You grew up in Silicon, grew up.
- [24:27]
Ro Khanna
In Philadelphia, Bucks County. I learned about William Penn, our Constitution and Valley Forge where they, where George Washington had his army. You know, we had a great education.
- [24:39]
Dave Rubin
So what do you make of that diagnosis? That I would say that, that for our generation, that's wonderful. That's wonderful. And growing up in New York, we probably had very similar public educations that, that would be very, very fundamentally different than what the average kid at a public school in Philly or in Long island where I grew up is learning.
- [24:56]
Ro Khanna
Now where do you, I mean, look, I, I do, I think we need to do better in public education. Absolutely. But I, I don't have a sense that there's been some massive decline. I mean I, I'd have to look at the, the scores and, and, and other evaluation. But I think that public education, you still have a lot of great teachers. They're still doing, working very, very hard. Now, I'm of a view that everyone needs to learn English, everyone needs to learn about American history. And we should be teaching that, that, that, that the history of this country, it's a great country, of course. Teach also about the challenges we've had with slavery and Jim Crow, because we teach honestly, of course. But my view is that, that, that the public schools are still working, but we need to do better and make them better in, in the 21st century.
- [25:43]
Dave Rubin
So when you see sort of the woke stuff that clearly we did not have at going to elementary school, in junior high, when you see that they're confusing children about their gender or teaching them that the actual founding of America was 1619 and not 1776 or the Neo racism, are they doing that?
- [26:00]
Ro Khanna
I mean, like I, I, you know, I believe that America's founding is 1776. Now, now you can say, look, the first people who were enslaved came in 1619. But you don't want that to be the start of America. What you want the start of America to be is the Declaration of Independence that says all people are equal because that's the aspiration of the American project. And so what I would say is.
- [26:24]
Dave Rubin
Sounded like a Republican, my friend.
- [26:26]
Ro Khanna
That sounds like an America. And so to me, one can talk about America being an extraordinary place, an extraordinary experiment. And what makes us extraordinary is also to understand the things we've overcome in our history. And I think the question is, don't you think 80% of Americans, Republicans or Democrats, have that view? And you've got a, I'm not saying that you don't have. Some people on the left would say the country started in 1619, but you also have people on the right who want to make that the issue to polarize.
- [27:01]
Dave Rubin
Well, I, but the difference, of course, both sides have their extremes without question. I would say the difference is that the, the more radicals on the left have institutional power. So if you were to go to your colleagues and say no power these days. Well, thankfully it's been a good, it's been a good couple weeks for us. But, but, but I would say that, that the, the people with influence in the Democrat Party, so the Bernie's, the Elizabeth Warrens, the AOCs, whether, whether you like these people or agree with them on everything, the people that seemingly have cultural. I don't think that they're fundamentally proud of America or believe in capitalism or believe that the.
- [27:35]
Ro Khanna
I know, I don't know. I don't know the.
- [27:37]
Dave Rubin
Well, I know he got rich In America.
- [27:39]
Ro Khanna
Wow. Come on. He got three houses.
- [27:41]
Dave Rubin
Being a socialist, that's pretty sweet.
- [27:43]
Ro Khanna
He's, he's a, he, he wrote books. I mean, come on. But, but, but, but Bernie's.
- [27:47]
Dave Rubin
Bernie, Bernie.
- [27:48]
Ro Khanna
You know what Bernie talks about when Bernie talks about his parents coming to America as, as immigrants. And he says he wasn't poor, but he says he knows what it was like for parents to struggle to make ends meet. And here he grows up and he runs for President of the United States twice. And you hear his brother, he gets emotional that someone like Bernie Sanders can be, can be a presidential candidate. Bernie loves this country. He just believes that people need health care and education, and it's kind of an FDR vision. But I, there, there are others in our party who, you know, may have this 1619 view. That's not Sanders. Sanders wanted economic transformation, and he's deeply, deeply, deeply patriotic.
- [28:33]
Dave Rubin
Right. So I, I don't have the exact take. Same take on him, but I would also say that the revolution is, is eating him, which is why he's largely irrelevant at this point, other than kind of screaming when with rfk, where he seemingly is defending Big Pharma, while Bobby's basically like, could we just look into what these organizations are doing? And now you have the, in effect, the socialist defending the institution.
- [28:56]
Ro Khanna
That's there because for, for Bobby Kennedy made a point, in my view, that was just unfair. And I'm not. There are things that Kennedy. Look, but Bobby Kennedy is talking about, we want to look at our food system and make sure that we don't have too much sugar in our sodas and dyes in our food. Fine. But he, he said to Bernie Sanders, look, you're getting all this money from big Pharma. And the truth of the matter is there are a lot of things you can criticize Bernie Sanders from, but he was not getting money from the pharmaceutical companies. He and I are on a bill that actually would say that Americans shouldn't pay more money than an average person overseas for drugs. The big pharma hates it. He had money coming from a lot of the employees of those companies who worked there, because he raised $200 million and some of them were giving 20 or $30. And that's.
- [29:46]
Dave Rubin
But did he not take 1.5 million from, from big Pharma, which was the most that they gave anybody?
- [29:51]
Ro Khanna
He, he, he, he ran a campaign that inspired a lot of people. 30, 50 hundred dollars who happened to be working at probably pharmaceutical companies. Some big, some not, but his policies were totally opposed by big Pharma and big pharma was spending big money against him. And that's, I think that's what, what really just upset is him because that's his whole thing is not to be for big money. And I, I wish that, you know, I wish there was just a more that these weren't gotcha moments. Because there, there are people in a our party. Look, when people say, oh, look at all the billionaire spending on the Republican side, I said there are more billionaires who spent money, of course. So I'm not, I'm trying to be fair about it. Sanders is a notable exception. He's more pure than any of us. I still take money from individuals up to $3,300. Sanders has literally never asked for a contribution from any individual. He gets all his money from a grassroots money. A lot of things you can criticize him for. That's not one of them.
- [30:48]
Dave Rubin
Right. So I'm, I guess then I would want to know what Bobby meant by saying you got more money than anybody. 1.5 million from big pharma. And then Bernie's answer was, I got all this money from small people. But Bobby's accusation was, you got more from big pharma than anybody.
- [31:01]
Ro Khanna
But he looked up open secrets. Open secrets. Anytime you give money to a politician, you got to disclose your, your occupation. And open secrets had tallied up every single person who had worked.
- [31:12]
Dave Rubin
I think that was separate though. But we don't have to get lost in that. But because Bernie was saying no, you're just tallying it up basically. And he was saying no, you took 1.5. And that's separate than all the individual donations.
- [31:22]
Ro Khanna
But.
- [31:22]
Sponsor Ad
But free speech is under attack.
- [31:24]
Dave Rubin
But Rumble refuses to back down.
- [31:25]
Sponsor Ad
Rumble has always believed in empowering voices, no matter how unpopular. And now Rumble's taking that fight to the next level. When major advertisers conspired to pull their dollars, even brands like Dunkin Donuts turn their backs, labeling Rumble as having a right wing culture. But Rumble's not here to fit a mold. It's here to defend free expression for everyone. To strengthen this mission, Rumble is launching Rumble Premium, an ad free experience packed with exclusive benefits for viewers and creators. More than a subscription, it's a stand for free speech. Your voice matters. Join Rumble Premium today For a limited time, get $10 off an annual plan with promo code rubin@rumble.com premium. Rubin. Whether you subscribe or just keep watching, your support keeps free speech alive. Let's turn the tide together there.
- [32:12]
Dave Rubin
Putting Bernie aside. I don't want to get too lost in Bernie. I do want to focus a little bit on the gender stuff and the race stuff, because I think if there's anything that drove this Trump wave, I think it largely were those two things, probably the gender thing more than anything else. I don't think this was really an election about trade or even economics or anything else.
- [32:29]
Ro Khanna
You don't think so?
- [32:30]
Dave Rubin
No, I don't. I think that the culture part of this. I think that this insane idea that girls can be boys and boys can be girls and then the obsession with race, and I do want to get into your exchange with JD as it relates to race. But. But what. What's your take on. On where the Democrats are at as it pertains to gender, which seems to me to be one of these things that it's so insane that in 2025 we have to even discuss.
- [32:53]
Ro Khanna
So my view of why that ad worked, you know, Kamala, is for they. Them. Donald Trump is for. For. For you. Is that it was about priorities. That people didn't believe that our party was singularly focused on their economic well being. They're getting good jobs, they're getting healthcare, they're getting education. And they thought we were being distracted by things that affect a small percent of the population. Look, my view is I believe everyone should be treated with dignity and have the freedom to be who they are. But I'm not gonna come and be judgmental of people who may disagree with me. But I'm gonna stand in my view, for in this country, we aren't cruel. We treat everyone with respect. And if someone wants to identify in. As the gender they are, then how is that hurting you or how is that hurting anyone else? Let's focus on what it's going to take to beat China and build good jobs and have health care. And my view is that's something that we can agree to disagree on some of these issues respectfully and focus on what's going to matter to most Americans.
- [34:02]
Dave Rubin
So I think I'm with you on all of that. But then it, it begs the question, do you believe that boys can become girls?
- [34:10]
Ro Khanna
I believe that. That people have a, a biological sex at birth, but I think that there are people who believe that they are misidentified at the. And. And I choose to identify with a gender and, and. And that's who they think they, they. They need to be to fulfill their happiness. And in our country, our Constitution says everyone has the right to pursue happiness. And if that's what they believe, why shouldn't they have the freedom to do that. And we're a kind country, a decent country. Let's not be cruel to people who have that belief. If, if you don't have that belief for your family, you can, you know, you can articulate that for yourself and your, your family.
- [34:49]
Dave Rubin
Yeah. So I'm actually with you on that. And to me, if you're 18 and you want to, and you're a guy and you want to put on a dress and call yourself a different name, as long as you treat me. Me with respect, I'll treat you with respect. So I'm with you on that. But. So you don't. But you do believe that there are two biological genders and that they're just making a choice to identify with the other one. I'm trying to clean this up for you a little bit in that I believe that people.
- [35:08]
Ro Khanna
I believe that you're born, you're not.
- [35:09]
Dave Rubin
Actually changing your gender.
- [35:11]
Ro Khanna
Well, I believe that. I believe that you're born, you know, with either an X usually most times with an XY chromosome or XX chromosome, you're born. There's a biological sex. That's what comes on your birth certificate. But there are people who fundamentally believe that their gender, their identity does not conform with their biological sex. It's called gender dysphoria. It's something that's existed for hundreds of years. And America is a country for many years these, these folks didn't have a choice. In most other places they were oppressed. But we're a country that recognizes people.
- [35:47]
Sponsor Ad
Sure.
- [35:48]
Dave Rubin
I'm just trying and this is only because I think this is one of the things that is so screwed up the Democrat party. So if someone's 20 years old, they were biolog basically born a male, they're 20 year old man now and they do whatever they do to their body. They can do whatever surgeries they want, they take whatever drugs they want, they dress differently, they change their hair. All of those things you don't believe or I don't want to put words in your mouth. Do you believe that they've altered their gender?
- [36:11]
Ro Khanna
I believe their gender is a woman. That's what they want to be identified as and that's their gender. Is their.
- [36:18]
Dave Rubin
Do you think they're biologically a gen. A woman?
- [36:21]
Ro Khanna
Well, their gender is which, which is what I'm focused on is what they self identify as. There, there's a biological birth, but then there's the gender. And that gender sometimes conflicts with what the biological identity birth was and in my view is what we should do is respect people's self expression of their gender because it doesn't, it doesn't affect my life. I mean it doesn't. And, and in this country want people to, to pursue their, their happiness. And as you know, we're talking about less than what, 1% of the population. I guess one of the things I've gotten frustrated with on both sides is while China is focused on investing in new industry and focused on leading in the world and on Taiwan, our politics, by your own point, seem caught up in how we're going to treat people who are transgender. Why can't we just agree to give some space and respect and focus on the things that are, that are really going to affect whether America reigns a preeminent nation?
- [37:23]
Dave Rubin
Well, I do agree, I do absolutely agree with that. I think the issue really is that it's because so much of this has been taught in schools. I mean, we know there is a social contagion, particularly with young girls. There's a ton of research on this that now are identifying as boys, but it's because so many of them have been taught this in our, in our public schools.
- [37:40]
Ro Khanna
What school is that? I mean, of young girls that are now, now identifying as, off the top.
- [37:46]
Dave Rubin
Of my head, I don't know the exact percentage, but Abigail Shrier wrote an incredible book called Irreversible Damage about just that, that there's a social contagion element to this where suddenly because so many kids are being taught in seventh grade health class that you can change your gender. I'm glad to hear you say that you can't change your biological reality, but that it then leads these kids to all sorts of other confusions and everything else else. And then we wonder why they're so anxiety ridden.
- [38:13]
Ro Khanna
Look, I, I, I think we're talking about a, a very, very small group of people. My, my general view is we want to be respecting people and their families to be making these, these decisions. We don't want the state to be mandating these things and that we need to. What I will, what I will give with what I'll concede on where my party went overboard is, is, is, is policing exactly the type of language and, and criticizing people if they happen to not have the right pronoun and an email sign off. And okay, so we don't, we, we don't have to be judgmental about it. On the other side, you know, there are trans kids who just are struggling to survive and we're not a cruel nation. Just, just let's have a dignity, respect and and focus on. On what things can bring us together.
- [39:08]
Dave Rubin
Right. Okay. I don't want to harp on this too much longer, but. But one more thing on this then. So would you want a biological boy at 15 years old to be wrestling or playing basketball with females?
- [39:20]
Ro Khanna
What I have said, and I voted. We voted on this in the House, and most Democrats voted against a federal ban on transgender kids playing. Playing sports. In, you know, a transgender woman playing in women's sports. There was a bill to ban all of that. I think every Democrat had voted against it, but two. And my view is that.
- [39:46]
Dave Rubin
Sorry, you were, you were for that or against that.
- [39:48]
Ro Khanna
I am not for a, A ban on. A federal ban on transgender kids.
- [39:55]
Dave Rubin
Well, just. Just to clean up the language. So people on a boy, on a.
- [39:59]
Ro Khanna
On a girl sports. On a seventh grade boy who identifies as a girl playing on a, a girls soccer team. There was a vote on that in Congress. All Democrats voted against the federal ban except two. And my view is that that is a decision that, that, that local school districts, that local communities can make. And not every sport is the same. There can be basic standards. If there is a. If you actually have a physical advantage in a sport, then that standard can be met so that there's fairness. If it's just a seventh grader who's doing this, who's not some great athlete and is doing it for a sense of belonging, that's probably fine. Right? And so I guess my view is why not just have the school districts make those decisions? Why do you need a federal ban?
- [40:45]
Dave Rubin
Right. So, okay, I can at least get on board whether it's a federal issue or not. I think that that's. Do you leave this to the states or whatever? I don't think those. Putting aside the skill level, which you're sort of whittling it down to the skill level. I mean, I don't think a boy should be in a girl's locker room. Simply put, regardless of their skin, there's.
- [41:04]
Ro Khanna
One thing about being. Playing a sport, and then there's the separate issue of how do we make sure that people have a sense of belonging and then at the same time that people feel safe and comfortable in most cases, I mean, maybe this is something in California or most cases where they have transgender kids playing in, in sports. A lot of times people don't care at seventh, eighth, ninth grade. Where it becomes an issue is these really competitive things in college and where people feel like they have a, a physical advantage. But what I have, what I've said, and I did this Whole conversation with Megyn Kelly on this is I understand that, that there's, there's a concern for safety for, for, for girls in their locker room and, and making sure that they feel safe. I also understand that there's a real genuine concern for belonging and people who are transgender who face a lot of discrimination. It's a difficult issue. Why don't we recognize people are coming at it in good faith and try to let communities figure this out and what makes sense for the school districts and communities.
- [42:09]
Dave Rubin
So let's move to some of the race stuff because I think the other part of this is that I think that the Democrat party has largely become an anti white, mostly racist party. And, and that, and, and I don't like saying that. I don't. You could hear the way I said it. I don't like saying it. But the abs. I mean, I can show you Washington. Well, a. I'm not talking about you specifically. Again, I had you on my short list of Democrats that maybe don't buy into all of this stuff, but I can show, I mean we play them on my show day after day of this crop of progressives. AOC and now Jasmine Crockett seems to be the new one right now. And, and, and we hear it from Bernie and we hear it even from Elizabeth Warren and all just this endless assault on white people and white supremacy and all of this stuff. I mean, well, first off, I guess do you think Donald Trump or Elon Musk or any of these people are white supremacists or racists?
- [43:00]
Ro Khanna
I've never, I've never used that view and I, I never speculate on what's in, in in people's hearts. I can I talk about policy. So let's get into exchange of with the Vice president. Sure. So there was a guy, 25 year old guy who made social media posts who said that normalize Indian hate and who said that we should repeal the 64 Civil Rights act which says that if you're a private business, you need to serve blacks or whites or Indians. You can't choose to discriminate. And who made comments about eliminating all of Palestine. I do think, think that person's tweets or social media posts were, were racist. Now do I think he is irredeemably racist? No, I think those tweets were racist. I said if you want to rehire him, I don't think he should be banned from life for a job. I don't think he should be banned from life from a federal government job. I think I'm fine, actually, if you want to hire him today after three months of that. And I got criticized for being willing to say that, but he's got to retract those statements and he's got to have some public apology for statements that I do think were racist. I, When I put that out, I thought that was kind of the middle ground. Of course, the Vice President disagreed.
- [44:18]
Dave Rubin
Okay, so we'll put the tweet up. But in essence, what JD said, and I'm roughly paraphrasing here, he was basically saying something that I tend to agree with, which in essence, he was saying that this is kind of shit posting, that people put up all of these crazy things online all the time, and that the idea that this kid was inherently racist or something else that. Because he obviously is married to an Indian woman and you're Indian. So there's a common, there's a common cause here in, in like.
- [44:45]
Ro Khanna
And I never said that the Vice President is.
- [44:48]
Dave Rubin
No, no, no, of course. But I think his broader point was if we're ever going to move past any of this nonsense, then we have to be very forgiving to kids that grew up with a phone in their pocket in a world that was very different than ours that say a bunch of horrible crap online. It's just, it's just part of life. As opposed to maybe, I don't know, a business leader who said some things privately about race that maybe could be construed differently or something like that.
- [45:12]
Ro Khanna
Forgiveness comes with accountability, right? If, when I was growing up, if I were to curse out a teacher or get into a yelling match with someone in, in school, you know, I wouldn't, I would have to apologize. I'd have to take some accountability. Forgive. If we just have a society, take away the, the, the, the issue of race. If someone was to, to, to, to make statements that were just deeply rude or insulting, we would want accountability. Right. I always thought that was a, A conservative value. And by the way, it could be on the flip side. Imagine if there was a Democrat who was in the White House and someone made racist statements about white people, and we just said, well, that's fine, we'll just hire him. I mean, I think you want to.
- [46:01]
Dave Rubin
You don't think that happens all the time? I mean, I can give you a long list of Democrat politicians in the last week saying terrible things about white people. And, and I mean, again, Jasmine Crockett and AOC constantly claiming that white people are white supremacists or bigots or all of these things. I mean, that happens all the time. Turn on cnn. You can, you can see that.
- [46:20]
Ro Khanna
But, but look, people saying that they ideologically believe that there are certain things that had white supremacy is different than talking about the specifics of white people. Let's normalize hate against white people. That's what he basically said. Imagine if he said let's normalize hate against Jewish people or let's normalize hate against any group. All I'm saying is have accountability for that. I guess the question in this country is this, can you extend grace? Yes. Can you make sure that we're not calling everyone a racist or a, or, or, or a sexist if you disagree with someone? Yes. But can we also realize that there actually are things that are racist and sexist that we shouldn't be saying and, and hold people to account when they do that?
- [47:10]
Dave Rubin
Of course. So when you see people in your party, aoc, Rashida Tlai, Bill Han, Omar, I mean, I am a firm believer. I'm gonna guess you don't agree with this. Exactly, but I believe they are Hamas supporters. I believe that. I guess. You don't think Rashid of Tlib supports Hamas.
- [47:24]
Ro Khanna
I haven't looked at all of her comments.
- [47:26]
Dave Rubin
Have you ever heard her condemn Hamas?
- [47:28]
Ro Khanna
Yeah. Didn't she condemned the, the October 7th killings? I mean, I, I, I'm, what do.
- [47:33]
Dave Rubin
You think, what do you think she means when she says river to the sea?
- [47:36]
Ro Khanna
So I voted to, to say that river to the sea should not be used, that it was wrong and I got criticized for my party. But let me tell you what someone who is Palestinian or sympathetic to Palestinians thinks they mean by that. They think they mean that from river to the sea, the Palestinian people should have freedom and rights. I said to groups who criticize my vote that when Jewish folks hear that conversation, they think you mean the elimination of Israel and the elimination of the Jewish people. So don't use that phrase even if you mean it in a different way.
- [48:14]
Dave Rubin
Right. Do you think they mean it in a different way?
- [48:16]
Ro Khanna
I think they sincerely, I don't, I, I don't think.
- [48:18]
Dave Rubin
What do you think they mean?
- [48:19]
Ro Khanna
I think they mean, and I disagree with this, but I think they mean they want one state in that area that's a multinational state with Jews in Palestine with equal rights for everyone. I don't, I, I believe that Israel should exist as a Jewish democratic state. And I, for a two state solution, not a one state solution. But that's what they, that's what they mean. But the, the point is, you know, we would be, we would be better off, you know, you should have, is have Rashida Tlaib on your show.
- [48:45]
Dave Rubin
We've invited her.
- [48:45]
Sponsor Ad
We've invited her multiple times.
- [48:47]
Dave Rubin
We've invited.
- [48:49]
Ro Khanna
Because I think if we're not. One of the great things about America is that if we can't have these conversations here, what hope is there for peace there? I mean, so I condemned the river to the sea chant. I voted to condemn it. But I don't think everyone who's saying that chant means that they want to eliminate the Jewish people.
- [49:08]
Dave Rubin
Right. For the record, we don't have time to go into it now, but I mean, I'm completely against the two state solution. I think it's absolutely absurd. Palestine never existed, as I'm sure you know. Even though many of your constituents probably don't want to hear you actually say.
- [49:19]
Ro Khanna
That, you don't think, you don't think that the Palestinian people there have a claim to that land, just like the Jewish people have a claim since King David.
- [49:26]
Dave Rubin
The Palestinians are not a people. They're not a people. They're Egyptians and Jordanians. I mean, Jordan, Jordan is the, is Palestine. Right? It's a majority Palestinian nation if they want a nation. But we don't have to do that right now. Let me just end on this because you guys are giving the signal real quick. You gotta go. What would you say is something. I fully enjoyed this and I hope we can do it again. It's been very refreshing, truly.
- [49:49]
Ro Khanna
I'll have to see how much criticism I get from my own party.
- [49:52]
Dave Rubin
It's really been, it's been very refreshing. And I think if there were more Democrats like you, I think politics would look very different. What do you think the future is for you politically? Because when I hear you, I think there's a lot of reasons that someone like you, along like Tulsi or Bobby, could really be sort of the more liberal wing of a very wide tent Republican Party. That makes more sense to me than trying to hang on to what I think has become a very radical party. So I'll leave, I'll leave you with that.
- [50:18]
Ro Khanna
Look, I don't. I think that what Donald Trump has done is defeated the establishments of both parties. And I say, look, Trump, Trump took over the Republican Party in a matter of years. I mean, I remember talking to Kevin McCarthy after January 6th, and I said, you know, Kevin, I think Trump may still be your nominee. He said, oh, he's done no way, never. And so what Trump shows is that people dislike the status quo. They're frustrated with a lot of the forces of globalization and the forces that took away their livelihoods and their dignity. And they're looking for a new approach in both parties. I want to lead that from the Democratic Party. And what you can be assured of are a few, couple, few points. One, I deeply love and believe in this country. And you can't fake that. You know, it's not about putting American flags at some convention. It's about a belief that, look, I grew up outside Philadelphia. I was born in Philadelphia. I grew up in Bucks County, 99% white. I had teachers who believed in me, Little League coaches who believed in me, even though I couldn't help that. This country, you know, I got to represent Silicon Valley, this. The. The arguably the biggest wealth generation place in the world. As an Indian American of Hindu faith, I love this country. There's no other country like it. This is an exceptional country. And all of the policies that I care about are come from that deep love of country that I want to see. People have economic industry here, economic opportunity in places left out. Healthcare, education. We can disagree on the specifics, but I'm on Team America. And the second thing I want to assure people is you may disagree with me on transgender rights, you may disagree with me in my spat with the vice president, but I'm not in it to have moral judgment, to have condescension. I fundamentally believe in the wisdom, ultimately, of the American people and that we have to extend some grace to each other as citizens because our challenge is to be the preeminent country in the 21st century and not let China do that.
- [52:15]
Dave Rubin
This has been an absolute pleasure. I appreciate your time. And we absolutely agree on the love of America. So thank you.
- [52:22]
Ro Khanna
Appreciate it.