Conor Lamb: Democratic Messaging, Crime, and the Trump Threat

Summary

Podcast Summary: "Conor Lamb: Democratic Messaging, Crime, and the Trump Threat"

Introduction

In the August 14, 2025 episode of To The Contrary with Charlie Sykes, host Charlie Sykes engages in a comprehensive discussion with Conor Lamb, a former congressman from Pennsylvania and a recent contributor to Substack. The conversation delves deep into the current state of the Democratic Party, challenges in messaging, the handling of crime statistics, the looming threat of Donald Trump, and intricate foreign policy issues.

State of the Democratic Party

Charlie Sykes opens the discussion by addressing the plummeting approval ratings of the Democratic Party, citing Gallup's 34% and CNN's 28% approval metrics. He probes Conor Lamb on the underlying causes of this decline, especially in an era when the Republican president grapples with multiple challenges.

Conor Lamb responds by attributing the low approval ratings primarily to perceptions of President Joe Biden rather than the Democratic Party as a whole. He states,

"Politics these days is a lot more about individual personalities than it is about party brands. [04:35]"

Lamb emphasizes the need for the Democratic Party to introduce new faces and cultivate a unified brand that transcends individual personalities. He criticizes internal divisions, particularly the contrasting approaches of figures like Abigail Spanberger and Steve Zoran, which he believes dilute the party's effectiveness.

Democratic Messaging and Crime

The conversation shifts to the pressing issue of crime and how it intersects with political messaging. Charlie expresses concern over Donald Trump's recent move to deploy troops in Washington, D.C., viewing it as a tactic to undermine Democratic credibility on law and order.

Conor Lamb counters by highlighting the actual improvements in crime rates across major cities, including Baltimore and Philadelphia, stating,

"I see violent crime and murders dropping in every single major city, practically. [06:57]"

He critiques Trump's strategy of sending untrained National Guard troops, arguing that it exacerbates rather than alleviates crime problems. Lamb advocates for a unified Democratic message that emphasizes effective and resource-backed law enforcement, contrasting it with Trump's performative "law and order" stance.

Bureau of Labor Statistics and Trust in Government

Charlie raises concerns about Trump's appointment of a MAGA loyalist as the Commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, emphasizing the threat this poses to the credibility of government statistics. He remarks,

"Donald Trump wants to bend facts... it's truly extraordinary. [27:13]"

Conor Lamb echoes these concerns, highlighting the importance of accurate data for informed policymaking. He points out the potential negative impact on job statistics and Social Security payments, emphasizing the long-term economic repercussions of diminishing trust in governmental institutions.

Redistricting and Gerrymandering

The discussion transitions to the contentious issue of redistricting, particularly focusing on Republican strategies in Texas aimed at securing additional congressional seats. Charlie expresses skepticism about the Democratic National Committee's emphasis on redistricting rallies amidst pressing issues like public safety and economic challenges.

Conor Lamb acknowledges the complexity of the situation, noting,

"If Abbott and Newsom are not able to stop this thing, then everyone is going to always be redistricting for partisan advantage every time. [32:18]"

He underscores the detrimental effects of continuous gerrymandering, such as voter fatigue and the erosion of democratic principles. Lamb advocates for maintaining focus on economic and affordability issues, suggesting that these areas resonate more with voters than the technicalities of redistricting.

Foreign Policy Challenges

The conversation broadens to encompass critical foreign policy issues. Charlie brings up Trump's impending summit with Vladimir Putin in Alaska, drawing parallels to their controversial Helsinki meeting and expressing concerns over potential abandonment of Ukraine.

Conor Lamb expresses apprehension about Trump's admiration for Putin's autocratic control and its implications for U.S. foreign policy. He warns,

"After Trump is gone, we're all going to pay the cost of that in terms of what a strength in Russia can do to us... [39:09]"

The duo also examines the evolving dynamics of U.S. support for Israel. Charlie notes a generational split in support, with younger voters, particularly Democrats, showing increasing disapproval of Israel's policies under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

Conor Lamb critiques Netanyahu's leadership, pointing out the incongruence between U.S. objectives and Israel's actions, and warns against equating Trump’s potential authoritarian maneuvers with legitimate political strategies.

Pennsylvania Politics and John Fetterman

Shifting focus to state politics, Charlie inquires about Senator John Fetterman’s performance and reelection prospects. Conor Lamb offers a candid assessment, highlighting Fetterman's lack of engagement and poor attendance in committee hearings.

"He's just not representing us, I guess, is how I would sum it up. [43:36]"

Lamb expresses skepticism about Fetterman's chances of reelection, citing dwindling support within the Democratic Party and Fetterman’s perceived disconnect from constituent needs and concerns.

Conclusion

As the episode concludes, both Charlie Sykes and Conor Lamb reflect on the multifaceted challenges facing the Democratic Party—from internal divisions and ineffective messaging to external threats posed by Trump and complex foreign policy dilemmas. The dialogue underscores the urgent need for the party to unify, clarify its vision, and effectively communicate its policies to regain public trust and advance their political objectives.

Notable Quotes with Timestamps:

• Conor Lamb on Party Brand:

  "Politics these days is a lot more about individual personalities than it is about party brands." [04:35]

• Conor Lamb on Crime Rates:

  "I see violent crime and murders dropping in every single major city, practically." [06:57]

• Conor Lamb on Redistricting:

  "If Abbott and Newsom are not able to stop this thing, then everyone is going to always be redistricting for partisan advantage every time." [32:18]

• Conor Lamb on John Fetterman:

  "He's just not representing us, I guess, is how I would sum it up." [43:36]

Final Thoughts

This episode of To The Contrary offers a deep dive into the strategic and ideological battles within the Democratic Party, the manipulation of crime narratives by GOP tactics, and the broader implications of current foreign policy decisions. Conor Lamb provides a critical insider's perspective, advocating for a more unified and proactive Democratic approach to reclaiming political ground and effectively countering Republican maneuvers.

Transcript

[Ad Voiceover]

BetterHelp online therapy bought this 30 second ad to remind you right now, wherever you are, to unclench your jaw, relax your shoulders, take a deep breath in and out. Feels better, right? That's 15 seconds of self care. Imagine what you could do with more. Visit betterhelp.com randompodcast for 10% off your first month of therapy. No pressure, just help. But for now, just relax.

And now, a next level moment from ATT Business. Say you've sent out a gigantic shipment of pillows and they need to be there in time for International Sleep day. You've got AT and T5G so you're fully confident, but the vendor isn't responding. And International Sleep Day is tomorrow. Luckily, AT&T 5G lets you deal with any issues with ease. So the pillows will get delivered and everyone can sleep soundly, especially you. ATT 5G requires a compatible plan and device. Coverage not available everywhere. Learn [e-mail] 5G Network.

I finally committed to getting back in shape. Hit the gym, ate clean, did everything right. But after two days, I felt drained. My body just couldn't keep up. That's when I found Stem Regen. It supports the release of my own stem cells to repair, recover, and actually rebuild from the inside out. Now I'm not just working, I'm bouncing back. I feel stronger, more energized, and more like myself every single day. Stem Regen didn't just change my routine, it changed my recovery. Empower your body to recover from within. Whether you are focused on recovery, longevity or just overall wellness, Stem Regen helps your body feel the best it can, release the best version of you. Try Stem Regen today at StemRegen CO. Use code POD25 for 25% off your first order. Again, that's StemRegen code POD25FOREIGN.

[Charlie Sykes]

Hey, welcome back to the to the Contrary podcast. I am Charlie Sykes. There's a lot going on. Donald Trump's initiatification of the BLS continues. We have troops in Washington, D.C. the president is prepared to go to Alaska to bend the knee to Vladimir Putin. We'll have a lot more to say about that, but I wanted to talk talk about some political developments and where we are right now before the midterms and obviously with the future of the country on the line. And so I am really pleased to be joined by Connor Lamb, a former congressman from the state of Pennsylvania and a recent addition to Substack. Welcome to the podcast, Connor.

[Connor Lamb]

Thanks for having me, Charlie. Good to be back with you.

[Charlie Sykes]

Well, look, there's so much to talk about, let's start about the state of the Democratic Party because and you and I had a very brief conversation about, you know, that Democrats have some, they're going through some things, you know, including coming to grips with the prime directive, which is to win some damn elections. If Democrats don't win elections, there's no way to stop Trump. And yet there seems to be this tendency to chase, you know, excuse me, you know, chase bright, shiny objects as opposed to, you know, talking about issues and running candidates that can win in swing districts. The majority makers. You won in a very, very tight, very swingy district in Pennsylvania. So I wanted to get your take on all this. The first question is, what ails the Democratic Party? What is wrong? I mean, right now, let's have a reality check. You know, every poll that you can find would suggest that Democratic approval ratings are at historic lows. I'm looking Gallup poll, 30, 34% approval rating for Democrats historically low. CNN's even lower, 28%. We could go through all of this. So what's going on with the Democrats? Why are their approval ratings so low at a time when we have a very unpopular president who's very who's underwater on one issue after another, pursuing an agenda that is also underwater? So, Conor Lamb, what's wrong with the Democratic Party right now? What ails them?

[Connor Lamb]

Well, I think there's a couple different things going on. One is that when it comes to the approval rating, I'm pretty certain that that number is basically a Joe Biden number. You know, it seems to me pretty clear that politics these days is a lot more about individual personalities than it is about party brands. And you can kind of see that when you're out and about among people, even people who vote for democrats, you know, nine elections out of 10 or 10 elections out of 10, they aren't really thinking through it in terms of like, party doctrine or party identity. They're thinking through it in terms of which politicians do they like. And I think that right now, the national Democratic brand is still defined by our most prominent recent office holder, Joe Biden. And when we get some wins under our belt, it's going to start to change people's perception of the brand. And you'll see those numbers change as they get new faces. So the connection to your question might just be the Democratic Party is having problems because we don't have enough new faces. People are still thinking of us in terms of like the last generation of faces. Then I also, this is a sort of a personal take that I've never really been able to convince other people of. But I think we have an inaccurate perception of ourselves in the sense that a lot of Democrats. Look at what Trump has done with the Republican Party. He has made basically every Republican almost the exact same. They have very little kind of heterodoxy among their party anymore, very little regional variation. They're all answerable to him. And there are a lot of Democrats that kind of envy that, because I think they see that as a guarantee of, like, getting done the things that they want to get done. Whereas in our side, we've had more difference of opinion among the. You know, take 2025 as an example. We're going to have Mikey Sherrill and Abigail Spanberger on the ballot on the same day as Zoram and Donnie, and they're obviously very different from each other. I think that's a good thing. Like, I'm perfectly fine with that. You know, I. I would love to be a party that can embrace that range of opinion, because in a country like ours, I think that's ultimately a better recipe for success. But our party has not really embraced that about itself yet. So we then spend a lot of time needlessly fighting each other about whether we should be more like Zoran or more like Abigail.

[Charlie Sykes]

Well, I mean, that's one of the questions people have. You know, what is the Democratic Party? Is it, you know, a centrist like Abigail Spanberger, or is it a democratic socialist of America like Zoron? I mean, isn't that one of the problems that the Democrats have? I mean, Donald Trump. I mean, for Donald Trump, you know, Zoron is a tremendous gift because he's going to go around the country saying, look, I was telling you, the Democrats are socialists. And here, look, they've supported a socialist, a socialist who is in the past talked about defunding the police. Doesn't that, in fact, play into the Republican agenda if, in fact, Zoran is, you know, one of the faces of the Democratic Party?

[Connor Lamb]

Well, I think the way you have to think about it is most of us in the Democratic Party didn't have a vote in the New York mayoral primary, and none of us have any control over what Donald Trump is going to do or say. So the question for us really is more how are we going to present our brand to the nation in terms of how we would lead the United States government? And that's going to be kind of who we nominate in 2028, and to a certain extent, who we nominate for these congressional and senate races in 20, 26. So, you know, my sort of broad view of the party is if a city like New York City wants to nominate someone like Zoran and try out his policies or whatever, there's nothing about me that's like afraid of letting them have that experiment. And I don't feel the need to chase him out of the party or anything like that. My concern is more at the level of state and national politics. We want to be conveying credible candidates with an actual background of service and getting things done who will give voters the confidence that if you put them into office, they're going to do a good job. And so, you know, I think that's why you see the Abigails and Mikey's and Josh Shapiro's in sort of the governor level slots, and that's who we want to be elevating.

[Charlie Sykes]

No, and I agree with you, but let me push back a little bit because, you know, clearly the issue of, you know, urban governance is going to be a big issue both in 26 and 28. And Donald Trump is going to nationalize it. He's already put troops on the streets of Los angeles. They're in D.C. right now. That clearly is a trial run for doing something similar in New York, maybe Chicago, Baltimore, who knows where else he might do it. And so what he's going to do is he will focus on these very, very progressive mayors and their record on crime and use that as a way of branding Democrats. Now the question is, how do Democrats respond? I mean, is it going to be sufficient to say, well, that's just Chicago or that's just Los Angeles, or that's just New York, or that's just washing D.C. how do you push back on that kind of thing? Because you can see it coming. You know what the playbook is going to be?

[Connor Lamb]

No, I think that's right. I think the frustration is, first of all, any mayor, whether they're DSA aligned, whether they're a centrist, whether Republican, whoever they are, they have to do a good job on crime. That's your job as a big city mayor. That's like job one for what the voters elect you for. So you should be taking care of your police. Obviously, you should be holding them accountable. But, like, you need to have them with the resources to get the job done. I think from where I sit, though, I look around the country and I see violent crime and murders dropping in every single major city, practically. Even Baltimore, which has a really progressive mayor, has had this huge drop in homicides. Philadelphia has a more centrist mayor They've similarly had a big drop in homicides. So all these mayors could credibly say, the policies I'm pursuing are helping us reduce crime. And Trump is going to do the same thing anyway. He's going to send in the National Guard anyway. So I think no matter what, a response from our party that's a little more unified, a little bit more of sort of all wings of the party standing together and saying, look broadly. The things that we are doing are reducing crime. Trump is just making things worse by sending a lot of people in there who are not trained to do it. If Trump wanted to lower crime in this country, he would just put more cops on the street. Like that's what you do. A lot of these police departments have a hard time hiring people, and then once they hire them, they can't really keep them because the pay is so low. Like here in Pittsburgh, they're still paying entry level officers Less than 60k, I think, and they can go into the suburbs and make in the 80s and 90s. And so if Trump wanted to actually help, he would put federal money behind that and solve that problem. But instead he's going to send in a bunch of people who aren't trained for that job. But he believes he controls those people, so he wants to send them in for that reason.

[Charlie Sykes]

Right. And it's very performative on his part. Now, look, he's been lusting to put troops on city streets for years now. He's been talking about this since Trump 1.0. Look, I mean, the deployment of troops to D.C. there's some obvious critiques. Number one, he could have done this on January 6th. The biggest crime wave in attack on police that ever occurred was on January 6th. What did he do? He did not send the National Guard in then. And then he pardoned the rioters who attacked the cops. I think we need to keep reminding people when he talks about law and order that he is in fact, a convicted felon. But I do think that there's a danger for Democrats here and there's a trap that Trump is doing, which is that if Democrats and their allies invest too deeply in the, you know, there is no crisis. You know, this problem is going away. I think they're going to be in the same position that they might have been with inflation. Let me just read you something that amazingly appeared on the M. NBC website, which is that the DC Takeover is extreme, but crime concerns are not unfounded. If Democrats want a governing majority again, they must meet voters where they are, not where they wish they Were that means facing hard truths like the one playing out in our nation's capital. Even as crime rates fall, many Washingtonians do not feel safe walking through Union Station, shopping on U Street, or living in Navy Yard. Folks are tired of seeing, seeing deodorant locked up behind plexiglass at cvs, which they are everywhere. They're frustrated of finding their car windows smash and seeing a teenager speed off on a rented E bike. And there was a Washington Post poll that found that 50% of D.C. residents, and these are overwhelmingly Democrats, view crime as extremely serious or very serious. So at some point, Democrats just can't simply cite the statistics or say that Trump is making up the crisis. They can say his response is extreme, but how can they credibly? I mean, what should they do to credibly say we are the ones who will more effectively fight crime? We're not denying it exists, but we are not the defund the police party.

[Connor Lamb]

Yeah, I'm with you on that. And I think what I was trying to say was, you know, if it was me, I think I would have been like, if I was the mayor of D.C. i think I would have been out there saying, Mr. President, one murder in my city is too many. One carjacking in my city is too many. I don't want any of these things to happen. For me to be able to reduce murders, reduce carjackings, reduce juvenile crime, I need whatever the number is, 250 more full time police officers. And I need X, Y and Z. Like, I just can't do it without that. We've been asking the federal government for this. Joe Biden, by the way, gave us some of these resources when he was in the White House. I'd love to see you give more than he gave. And I think something like that would help because obviously that's not defund the police. It's the exact opposite. It's saying we need more resources to give these police officers. And we think crime is a serious issue. But I think it's important to do it in that sense because we also can't give in to the idea that Trump's doing the right thing. He's sending in people that don't know what they're doing. And that's not going to help reduce crime, especially not for 30 days, which I think is all that's authorized right now.

[Charlie Sykes]

Well, and it's going to get worse because we have, what, 10,000 news ICE agents who are going to be coming online and where are they going to go? How is he going to do that. You know, the other question, and I know you've written about this as well, and look, I don't want this to become, you know, beat up on Democrats being really bad at messaging, you know, podcast, although they are really, really bad at messaging. You know, for example, at the time when Donald Trump is posing as, you know, I back the blue, you know, and I am the law and water president, as you not he's in the process of absolutely eviscerating and gutting the FBI. So, you know, at some point to say, look, the only guy who's defunding the police, who's destroying our ability to keep America safe right now, is Donald Trump doing what he's doing to the FBI. I mean, that in itself is a huge story with generational significance, don't you think?

[Connor Lamb]

I think it is, absolutely. And it's something I try to call attention to all the time. But it kind of goes back to the problem that you're putting your finger on, which is that we haven't established ourselves as credible on the overall law enforcement issue. And I don't think the public is looking to us right now to protect them from the most basic crime. And as a result, when we try to speak about the FBI or Trump defunding the police or whatever, the message isn't going as far as it should, even if we're saying the right thing, because we haven't. I don't think we've captured the fundamentals of making people feel like we understand the need to be safe and invest in their local communities and stuff. So that. That is something the Democratic Party really needs to work on. I think there are plenty of mayors and governors out there that are trying to establish that case, but we. We do have to talk about it. And I think some of the. Honestly, the most important voices have been these people that left the FBI. Like, I know the one guy who is in Chinese counterintelligence has been making the podcast rounds, and he's been very effective. And he's not a Democrat. Like, he's a longtime Federalist Society member conservative, talking about how dumb it was for Trump to run him out just because he went to a concert with Peter Strzok. So if we can help get those voices into the public, maybe they'll start to listen to, you know, how big of a mistake it is to allow Trump to get away with this.

[Charlie Sykes]

Yeah, I mean, I think there are so many vulnerabilities that particular story. But the reports that you have FBI agents who are being retasked to walk the Streets of Washington D.C. doing God knows what. Well, they're being taken away from other things. They're taking away resources from sex trafficking, they're taking away resources possibly from anti terrorism. And again, these are points where Democrats could actually go at real vulnerabilities of Republicans. You know, instead of, you know, talking about, you know, saying, well, yeah, the figures are made up, saying, look, what are these police officers not doing? What is Donald Trump dismantling here? Because I think he's really vulnerable. You know, again, there's two ways of going in politics. You go at someone's weakness or you go at their strength. I think you can go right at what Donald Trump thinks is his strength, which is law and order, which in fact, I think is going to turn out to be a weakness. I don't wanna, you know, keep on all of. So I have this question in the back of my mind and I am not a Democratic strategist in any way whatsoever, but I get asked this question all the time, mainly because my take on politics is that we're post ideological, that I am opposed to what Donald Trump is doing. I think Donald Trump poses this existential threat. So almost everything that I do is about how do you oppose Donald Trump? But at some point you need to present an alternative. And somebody asked me the other day, okay, so Democrats have made it clear they oppose Donald Trump. They haven't been very effective in stopping Donald Trump. They haven't been very effective in slowing him, even in slowing him down. But what are Democrats for? What is the Democratic vision right now that you would do for me as a middle class person living in Wisconsin? And they asked me this question, I thought, boy, you know what, I'm gonna talk to a real smart guy in a couple of days about. But I don't have a quick answer for you. Donald Trump and MAGA can run through all kinds of stuff that they are doing that they are for. What are Democrats for right now?

[Connor Lamb]

Yeah, well, I mean, what I was saying earlier about the nature of our party and its breadth makes it difficult for us to answer that question collectively because I think there is disagreement. I think if you're asking me, the way I always think about it is when I first showed up on a Marine Corps base as a young officer, I was surrounded by 18 and 19 year olds from all over the place. And they got there after being given free training for their job by the government, which they were being paid to do, often for months and close to a year on end, then placed in a job like let's say you're running satellite communications or cryptography, or you're fixing trucks or you're fixing planes, whatever the case. And on every single base, they had housing that was either free or affordable. They had childcare that was either free or affordable. They had health care that was entirely free. And the educational opportunity was that you could take any college class you wanted in your spare time for free without even touching the GI Bill that was waiting for you at the end of your service. All of that added up to the creation of opportunity that you still had to work really hard to take advantage of. Like, becoming a Marine is not easy. And no one, no one lets you in that organization for free. But once you put in the effort on the front end, whether you're from the smallest town in the middle of Wisconsin or whatever, all these opportunities were there because they were essential to the mission. Right? Like you have to have childcare if people are going to be going out on deployment or doing a dangerous job around the clock. Same thing with health care, to keep people on the actual job. And so to me, like a lot of the things that the Democrats are for when it comes to health and childcare and education, when we have lost or been unpopular or untrustworthy, I think it's when people think we just want to go around handing these things out willy nilly, you know, at sort of any cost and with no concern about whether they're effective. Whereas I think a winning recipe for the Democrats is more in that vein of if you're willing to put in the work and devote yourself to something higher and really invest in yourself, we're going to make sure the opportunities that are there. And the difference between us and Donald Trump is he takes away those opportunities from people and he doesn't create any new ones in their place.

[Charlie Sykes]

No, I think that that opportunity and prosperity, it really comes down to people look at the parties and they go, who is going to make me prosperous? Who is going to keep me safe? And there are answers to all of those things, you know, and as opposed to, and again, I think that there's also a sense that there's a sense that, you know, people want to, want to believe that if you work hard and you play by the rules, you will get ahead. And I think that that cuts in a lot of different ways that cuts the opportunity that you're describing. But also this is where illegal immigration comes in. Well, what do you mean you're getting ahead and you're not playing by the rules? You know, those are the key things work Hard play by the rules, you will get ahead as opposed to the handouts, the grifting, the cronyism that Trump has had. It seems like a target rich environment going after somebody who claimed to be for the little guy who is now running a government which is based on grift and graft, corruption and special interest favors for the most spectacularly wealthy people we have ever seen in human history. And there's got to be a, there's, there's got to be a wedge there that cuts across a lot of different ideologies.

[Connor Lamb]

I think there, there is. I mean, the way I think of it, I've been traveling around my state here and going to all these different counties that voted for Trump 70 to 30. And I've just been asking people, you know, Trump doubled his family's wealth from last year to this year through people buying his cryptocurrency. It's, it's corruption, it's open. Has he doubled anyone's wealth in Pennsylvania next year? He's going to pay less in taxes for sure than he paid this year. Are you going to pay less in taxes next year? Absolutely not. He's going to have the same health care at the same cost next year that he has this year. Are you? No. I mean, we're going to. Millions of people in our state are going to get kicked off of Medicaid and then everyone else pretty much is going to pay more. Our nine largest insurers have all asked for the largest premium increase that they're allowed to ask for under the law. So, you know, you start to stack these things up and you say, life is getting more expensive for people in these Trump counties all over Pennsylvania while he just gets richer and richer and does perfectly fine. And, you know, I think that's a big part of our midterm case. I don't think it answers your question about what is the Democratic Party offering, which is more of the 2028 issue. But I think the issue in the midterms is, you know, are people going to be willing to punish him for not doing what he said he was going to do?

[Charlie Sykes]

So tell me, these are, when you, when you make those points, when you make that case, what kind of a reaction do you get? What do you hear in these Trump counties? What do people say?

[Connor Lamb]

You know, it's a mixed bag. There are definitely a lot of people out there who are just with them no matter what, and they assume everything that I'm saying is not true. But you can definitely detect a frustration and uncertainty all over the place on the issue of prices, because they have not gone down, down. People know that. And, you know, they're seeing this issue of the health insurance increases. We also just. We just had the largest electricity auction on our grid that we've ever had. As far as what the prices are going to be paid for electric power, that's going to push people's prices up next year. We've got, I think, 2 million student loan holders in our state. You know, so when he made those big cuts to student loans in the beginning, beautiful bill. Those people's bills are already going up, and you can see that that's percolating. And people are looking around kind of going, I thought it was supposed to get better. And a lot of the tariff impact is kind of just hitting now. You know, you're reading about big construction projects that are getting canceled because the materials are just too expensive and things like that. So I think that, you know, kind of slowly is adding up, and that's a hard thing for Trump to convince people they're not seeing because they're experiencing it in their own bank account.

[Charlie Sykes]

Well, this is interesting because, of course, you know, affordability is going to be a big issue. Was an issue. Inflation was an issue. It's clearly an issue. It's one of the things that Zoron ran on in New York. I think his answers are wrong, but obviously it resonated. I know that Abigail Spanberger is talking about affordability, and you've just made a pretty good case for people to say, you know, are you better off than you were before? So on the tariffs issue, it is interesting that at least the polls that I've seen would suggest that people actually do understand the tariffs are taxes, and the tariffs raise the price of things they buy. So is that cutting through?

[Connor Lamb]

I think so. In. In the abstract, I don't know how many people were able to connect the dots to, like, the price they're paying today and the tariffs. The people I know in business are mostly just resetting their tariff, their prices now due to tariffs, because they had enough inventory in April when this all went into effect to kind of make it through the summer on the existing prices. So I think we really are seeing it just start to set in. But we are definitely seeing headlines from time to time that, you know, such and such a project is being canceled because of the tariffs. So it seems like it's starting with the larger investment decisions that are trickling down.

[Charlie Sykes]

Okay, so what are the other issues that cut through? Is Epstein cutting through? Because I want to actually get into this. The insider issues and the outsider issues, the ones that actually people are talking about versus the stuff that you talk about in the MSNBC green room. So Epstein looked like he was breaking through for a while. Now there seems to have been a lot of distractions. But what is your sense? How does that play into the perception of Donald Trump with the people you talk to?

[Connor Lamb]

Yeah, I didn't think it made a big impact. I think that people that already hated Trump, you know, took it as one more exhibit in evidence of his character. And what I think a lot of people on the left forget is that many people who voted for Trump and would even call themselves Trump supporters don't like him, would never want to hang out with him or introduce him to their children or anything like that. It's more that they think he's effective and that he takes a wrecking ball to an establishment they don't like. And so as much as the Epstein thing, I think made a lot of people uncomfortable, it ultimately is unrelated to the reason that many people support him.

[Charlie Sykes]

Hmm. So let's talk about the. Let's talk about the story about the bls, the president firing the commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics because the jobs numbers were right. This strikes me as kind of an insider story, but I wanted to get your reaction to it, because Donald Trump wants to bend reality to his will. He wants to bend facts. And now they're putting in a MAGA loyalist as commissioner of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which would suggest that we're very close to having markets that will no longer regard government statistics as credible. They no longer trust the integrity of all of that. So talk to me about that, because in many ways, we talk in abstract about authoritarianism and everything, but this kind of flexing of his muscles is truly extraordinary. Your reaction as a former member of Congress.

[Connor Lamb]

Yeah, no, it's awful. I mean, we have to be able to make decisions on some kind of true facts. And, you know, there are very few decisions we make as public officials that are more important than the ones that affect people's jobs. You know, when you come from a place like Western Pennsylvania or Wisconsin, you have have some idea of what it's like for a community to live through a big job loss. You know, around here, it's the shutdown of the steel mills in the 70s and 80s, which, you know, even though it was 40 some or more years ago, it's like, still very much part of the consciousness here, and everybody's still alive that remembers it, and families were affected by It. And so, you know, if he's trying to create a system where we're not going to be able to see something like that coming, you know, just, just take the tariffs are such a perfect example. His argument on tariffs is that it's going to return manufacturing to places like Western Pennsylvania. Well, thanks to our state statistics, I know that we have 2,000 fewer manufacturing jobs right now in Western Pennsylvania than we did last summer when Joe Biden was president. And so you can reasonably ask, when is the effect of the tariffs going to start? Seems like we're going in the opposite direction. And if that 2,000 becomes 5,000 becomes 10,000 over the next year. But nobody knows that because he's hiding the statistics. All of a sudden, Western Pennsylvania is going back to where we don't want to be. And it's our job to prevent things like that, which we can't really do if we don't have the real facts.

[Charlie Sykes]

Well, it's also, I don't know how many voters have connected all the dots here, but the Bureau of Labor Statistics also comes up with the numbers that are used to determine the cost of living increases for Social Security payments. Right now that has real relevance in real world for people. And so, again, in terms of things that Democrats ought to be talking about, they ought to be saying, look, you notice what he's doing that is going to affect Social Security? Because that is a very tangible, real thing. And I'm not sure that Trump has even thought through the implications of basically fucking around with that.

[Connor Lamb]

No, I think that. That he and his people think if they just get a loyalist in there, they'll be able to mess around with the controls to their advantage however they want. But the problem is that the economy is a really complicated thing. And if you start trying to lie and hide the ball and, you know, manipulate the information, there's all kind of ways that that can blow up on us and really hurt a lot of people. So the reason that they had a neutral career person in there to begin with was there was a good reason for that. It helps with the trustworthiness that we all kind of rely on to go about our business.

[Charlie Sykes]

So almost everything we've been talking about are issues that really you can talk to voters about, that voters are going to pay attention to, they might actually see in their own life. I want to talk about an issue that's really important. I got myself in a little trouble on this yesterday, so I wanted to bounce this off of you. The real threat the Democrats face right now is on Redistricting and what the Republicans are doing in Texas. So talk to me a little bit about the politics of redistricting and how. And again, we both know what Democrats are going to do and what they have to do. But what is the end game at the end? I mean, when you have an eye for an eye, you know, an ear for an ear, and then when everybody's blind and deaf, where are we at? I guess.

[Connor Lamb]

No, that's. That's what is so terrible about this scenario is that where it leads is basically a lot of states redistricting every two years. That. That's where this has to go. Right. If. If Abbott and Newsom are not able to stop this thing, then everyone is going to always be redistricting for partisan advantage every time. The problem with that is, obviously, it's going to fatigue the public and no one's going to want to, you know, participate. But also, you're going to, at some point then end up with maps like we used to have where the Republicans would get, you know, 8 or 10 million fewer votes nationwide and still end up with a majority. Like, that's just. Yeah, that's not really a small Democratic system at that point, at least as it should be. I hate this issue. It makes us all look awful. Awful. And so, you know, what the Texas Democrats are doing, I think is the right thing. As. As difficult as it is. And as much as we didn't really want it to get to this optically, it's. It's horrible, of course. But if we don't find a way to kind of checkmate Abbott, I think we end up in this situation of almost constant redistricting. You know, I think we need to remind the public that we tried to ban gerrymandering at a national level level four years ago, and zero Republicans voted for it. All the Democrats voted for it. And, you know, ultimately, where I come out on it is I was originally elected in a gerrymandered district, and it was not gerrymandered in my favor. It was gerrymandered in the opposite way. It was drawn by a computer program called Red Map. That's what the Republicans did to. To create those congressional districts.

[Charlie Sykes]

Very subtle.

[Connor Lamb]

And we still won, you know, and then we won a bunch of gerrymandered districts in. In the fall of 2018 as well. So. So it's a lot to ask for us to overcome that, but when we are making the right arguments, we do overcome it. So I think we need to maintain a certain confidence in ourselves here, too.

[Charlie Sykes]

Okay, I agree with You. And again, this is where it gets to be really, really, really complicated. Because, you know, right now, so much rests on the 2026 midterm elections. Donald Trump has ordered Texas essentially to steal three to six additional congressional seats. Democrats can't just sit back and play and say, okay, we're going to let you do that. On the other hand, you know, the counter gerrymandering is a race to the bottom. So what I wrote about this was, and I got a little bit of flack for it. I said, look, you know, let's be honest about it. This is deeply hypocritical, but it's profoundly necessary they have to do it. And yet, let's not pretend that now embracing counter gerrymandering is somehow pro democracy. It's necessary. It's about power. And it's kind of, you know, we're both wincing about all of this. Which bring me to the decision by the department, which brings me to the decision by the Democratic National Committee to have rallies. You've heard about this, the rallies in 20 states over the weekend on this issue of redistricting. And I'm a little puzzled by their prioritization because, again, I understand you have to fight fire with fire. And I said this the other day on msnbc, but I said, you know what, there are so many other issues you should be having rallies about. You and I have been talking about all of them. You know, the attack on public health, the attack on, you know, public safety, the attack on the rule of law, the corruption, the abandonment of Ukraine, all of these things. And yet what are people going to be holding signs around the country saying no gerrymandering at a time when Democrats are going to be gerrymandering? I don't know. I guess I'm not saying don't fight. I'm just saying why would Democrats choose this issue to have public rallies on when there's so much other stuff going on?

[Connor Lamb]

Yeah, no, it's a great question. I think your analysis is pretty much correct there. We've all seen the maps of Illinois and other states where Democratic leaders obviously gerrymander their districts. And all I can really say is there was a class of U.S. newly elected Democrats who were ready to get rid of gerrymandering completely, in part because I think people forget there's a. There's an issue here that has to do with the quality of public officials that you get from gerrymandering. And I think there were a lot of us who were younger and came into Congress and looked at the leadership on both sides and said these people have been around too long and they're not working very hard. And part of the reason for that is because they're in these really, really safe districts where no one holds them accountable. So that still is the standard for us. I agree that capturing something like that in a rally is probably pretty difficult to do. And you know, for my part, whenever I get the chance to talk to, I don't really talk to anyone from the dnc, but whenever I talk to people in Democratic leadership, all I encourage them to do is really try to keep this focus on affordability costs in the economy because that's where people are looking for us to lead.

[Charlie Sykes]

Well, I agree. And I guess, look, people are really, really frustrated. I think that one, going back to my first question about, you know, why Democrat approval ratings are so low is that I think even Democrats are disillusioned. They want Democrats to fight. They want Democrats to be out there. They want Democrats to be able to stand at thwart Trumpism. And I certainly agree with them. And I think that there are millions of Americans that would turn out on the issues that we've been talking about here, that would turn out about what they're doing to public health, what they're doing to science, what they're doing to truth, what they're doing to the rule of law. There's plenty of things I kind of wonder about. The insider issues versus the outsider issues. Okay, so let me just switch gears a bit to two increasingly difficult foreign policy questions. Next couple of days, Donald Trump is going to go to Alaska to meet with Vladimir Putin. Remember the last time they had a summit in Helsinki? It certainly looks like he's prepared to abandon Ukraine. Your thoughts about that?

[Connor Lamb]

I guess, first of all, all I can say is, is I hope that's not what he does. He has really tacked back and forth a lot on Ukraine, though. I mean, I guess it's good that he hasn't totally abandoned them already. But, you know, it's, it's obvious that Trump really admires Putin's level of control over his own country and his country resources. People forget Putin is one of the wealthiest people, as far as we know, in the entire world. And it's because he steals the wealth of the people of his country. And so you can just kind of look at that and say, wow, that's who Trump admires. But given what Trump's doing with crypto, you know, it's not so far fetched to say that he sees himself enriching.

[Charlie Sykes]

His family it's who Trump wants to become. Yeah. It's not just that he admires it at that point.

[Connor Lamb]

You're, you're saying this isn't just a normal sort of foreign policy choice. Should we side with Ukraine or should we side with Russia? You're talking about someone like Trump potentially siding with Putin kind of for his own gain and not for all of our gain. And it's, you know, are we going to feel the impact immediately if Putin is able to take over the eastern half of Ukraine and be a little bit closer to NATO and sort of mainland Europe? No, we won't feel it immediately, but over time, you know, well, after Trump is gone, we're all going to pay the cost of that in terms of what a strength in Russia can do to us and the fraying of these alliances with Europe that we've had for very long. And so he's not, he's not showing any leadership, any thought about the long term here. And, you know, my hope is that somebody that he listens to can talk him out of what he looks like.

[Charlie Sykes]

He'S about to do. Yeah. And Europe has been pretty solid on this. Okay. So the, the much more complicated issue, both in terms of substance and the politics, is Israel. I mean, there used to be an absolute bipartisan consensus of support for Israel, overwhelming public support. Democrats were all in on it. And now, given what's been happening in Gaza, you see a real split, in fact, and it's a generational split. People of my generation continue to support Israel. Younger voters, particularly among Democrats, overwhelmingly disapprove of Israel. So what give me your sense of the politics of that. Because it used to be the pro Israel politics was a no brainer for anybody running for office. No longer the case.

[Connor Lamb]

Yeah. I mean, I think that it's hard to look at what Netanyahu is doing and how he's behaving and not be disgusted with the idea that, you know, United States tax dollars are basically supporting this person who might be prolonging a war in order to keep himself in power and not for any legitimate objectives. So I think in the past kind of consensus times that you're talking about, which aren't that long ago, it seemed easier to understand that the objectives that Israel had were the same or similar to our objectives. But it no longer looks that way to me with Netanyahu in charge. Like, we still say that we want a two state solution, and it really looks like Netanyahu was determined to never allow the Palestinians to have a state, no matter what, no matter who's in charge with them. And so immediately, you've got a conflict between what America wants and what he wants. And you just get this feeling like Trump is giving away the store to him, and you don't know why. It's, again, this example of you feel like Trump looks at someone and sees what he wants to be and how he wants to control things. And, you know, you, I, I just hope that he doesn't start, get the idea that if he starts a war, you know, it'll, it'll help keep him in power for 30 years or however long Netanyahu has been there. So I, I think, you know, obviously there's a lot of things said on the left about Israel and, and anti Semitism broadly that are wrong and offensive and come from the wrong place, but there is this reaction to what Netanyahu is doing that we all realize it's no longer tenable.

[Charlie Sykes]

Yeah, well, that's exactly where I've been. And this is really painful for me as somebody that has supported Israel for as long as I can remember and who is very, very supportive after October 7th and very concerned about the bad faith anti Semitism that we saw. But then to watch what's been happening and the starvation in Gaza and the atrocities in Gaza and the cynicism of Benjamin, Benjamin Netanyahu, by the way, you touched on something. Look, Donald Trump loves emergencies. Emergencies give him power. He cites what is. I think he's declared, like, more than 30 emergencies in order to flex his power. There's no emergency, you know, more powerful than war, which is why I've been very, very skeptical of embracing Donald Trump as a wartime president, which leads me to ask a question about Pennsylvania politics. We could spend time talking about your governor, who, by the way, I think should have been Kamala Harris, running mate. That's my own personal opinion. But what's going on with John Fetterman? What is your take on John Fetterman? Are you comfortable talking about that? I know you ran against him in the primary, but what the hell, Give me your take.

[Connor Lamb]

I don't have any explanation for his conversion into whatever he is now. I don't think I know him well enough, and I don't. I mean, very few people really have an inside lane with him or talk to him. You know, I mean, he's. Yeah, he's lost a lot of staffers. It's really unclear.

[Charlie Sykes]

Yeah.

[Connor Lamb]

Who influences him these days. I mean, he's get spotted, like, having dinner with Steve Bannon in D.C. so that tells you something about not encouraging. You know, I think what bothers me is he likes to portray it like people are going after him, him, because he has taken a certain position on Israel or because of some stance on immigration or whatever, as if they're attacking him for being, you know, quote, unquote, moderate. That's not my view. My view is he's not doing his job. So, you know, earlier this year, it was reported that I think he had missed 43 out of 45 of his committee hearings and assignments. He'd missed more votes than pretty much any other senator this session. And, like, we're in the middle, middle of the August recess now he's in Pittsburgh. The only time he was ever seen was when there was this explosion at U.S. steel two days ago because there were TV cameras there. He drove down there to be in front of the cameras. But he doesn't make himself available to constituents. He doesn't do town halls. He doesn't really even show much of an interest in, like, the. All these things I've mentioned to you today about the health insurance premiums and electricity rates and jobs and tariffs and all. You know, there's just nothing from him on that. It's like, kind of all Israel all the time. And then, you know, the occasional time he'll go on Bill Maher to take a swipe at AOC or whatever. So he's just not representing us, I guess, is how I would sum it up.

[Charlie Sykes]

Yeah. So is he running for reelection? Can he be reelected?

[Connor Lamb]

That I don't know. I mean, you know, he still has three more years. Like, we're not even technically halfway through his term. So I guess maybe he could try to start doing the job a little bit better. My sense from being around Democrats all over the state is that the bottom has just totally dropped out in his support within our party. And so it's difficult for me to see how he would present himself as a Democrat again. But, you know, he has claimed he wouldn't make any changes, so it'll be interesting to see if he goes back on that.

[Charlie Sykes]

Yeah, it's hard to imagine him switching to the Republican Party and having it work out for him. Do you think there's any possibility? I mean, he's having. He was having. Have lunch or dinner with Steve Bannon.

[Connor Lamb]

All I can say is that, you know, I've criticized him plenty in the last few months, as have many others. And the only people that ever come to his defense are not just Republicans, but pretty, pretty dedicated MAGA Republicans. You know, they really seem to be prioritizing, protecting him for some reason. And so you have to ask yourself what that reason is. And I don't know if they're trying to, trying to persuade him to come over and that's why they're doing that. But again, this just all comes back to, like, he never faces any sort of questioning or accountability of his constituents. Like, to me, a working senator should be out and about in public enough that someone can find a way to put this question to them, like a reporter or a constituent or whatever. Even Dave McCormick, who I don't agree with on a lot of things. He works hard enough and he's out there enough in the community that like, like people are getting questions into him all the time that he has to answer and we have some sense of how he's thinking or what he's doing. Fetterman there's just nothing. And it's like he forgets that the taxpayers are the ones that pay his salary.

[Charlie Sykes]

Yeah, I think he'll be reminded at some point. Connor Lamb, thank you so much. It's been a long time since you and I spoke. I think you and I spoke when I was at a different podcast. So it is great to talk with you. Thank you so much for your time.

[Connor Lamb]

Great to see you again. Thanks.

[Charlie Sykes]

And thank you all for listening to today's episode of to the Contrary podcast. You know why we do this, why we're going to continue to do this? Because now more than ever, it is important to remind ourselves on a regular basis that we are not the crazy ones.

[Ad Voiceover]

Thank you. BetterHelp Online Therapy bought this 30 second ad to remind you right now, wherever you are, to unclench your jaw, relax your shoulders, take a deep breath in and out. Feels better, right? That's 15 seconds of self care. Imagine what you could do with more. Visit betterhelp.com randompodcast for 10% off your first month of therapy, no pressure, just help. But for now, just relax.

And now a next level moment from AT&T business. Say you've sent out a gigantic shipment of pillows and they need to be there in time for International Sleep day. You've got AT and T5G so you're fully confident, but the vendor isn't responding and International Sleep Day is tomorrow. Luckily, AT&T5G lets you deal with any issues with ease. So the pillows will get delivered and everyone can sleep soundly, especially you. AT&T5G requires a compatible plan and device. Coverage not available everywhere. Learn [e-mail] 5G Network.

Did you know Tide has been upgraded to provide an even better clean in cold water. Tide is specifically designed to fight any stain you throw at it, even in cold butter. Yep. Chocolate ice cream. Sure thing. Barbecue sauce. Tide's got you covered. You don't need to use warm water. Additionally, Tide pods let you confidently fight tough stains with new coldzyme technology. Just remember, if it's gotta be clean, it's gotta be tied.

High interest debt is one of the toughest opponents you'll face unless you power up with a Sofi personal loan. A Sofi personal loan could repackage your bad debt into one low fixed rate monthly payment. It's even got superspeed since you could get the funds as soon as the same day you sign. Visit sofi.compower to learn more. That's sofi.com loans originated by Sofi Bank NA member FDIC. Terms and conditions apply. NMLS 696891.

[Charlie Sykes]

Acast powers the world's Best Podcasts here's the show that we recommend.

[Nikayla Matthews Akomay]

If you've ever dreamed of quitting your job to take your side hustle full time, listen up. This is Nikayla Matthews Akomay, host of Side Hustle Pro, a podcast that helps you build and grow from passion projects to profitable business. Every week you'll hear from guests just like you who wanted to start a business on the side. If you can't run a side hustle.

[Charlie Sykes]

You can't run a business.

[Nikayla Matthews Akomay]

They share real tips and so I started connecting with all these people on LinkedIn and I saw Target supplier diversity was having office hours. Real advice. Procrastination is the easiest form of resistance and the actual strategies they use to turn their side hustle into their main hustle. Getting back in touch with your tangible cash and sitting down and learning to give your money a job like it changes something. Check outside Hustle Pro every week on your favorite podcast app and YouTube.

[Charlie Sykes]

Acast helps creators launch, grow and monetize their podcasts everywhere.

[Connor Lamb]

Acast.com.