GOP Sees Limit To Trump's Popularity

Summary

Podcast Summary: What A Day – Episode: GOP Sees Limit To Trump's Popularity

Host: Jane Costen
Guest: Burgess Everett, Congressional Bureau Chief for Semaphore
Release Date: November 11, 2024

---

Introduction and Election Overview (00:02 – 03:05)

In the November 11, 2024 episode of What A Day, host Jane Costen kicks off by addressing recent election outcomes amid a shifting political landscape. Highlighting the Republican Party's success in securing a majority in the Senate and the potential takeover of the House, Costen sets the stage for a deep dive into the implications of these results.

She underscores a surprising development: despite Republicans making significant strides nationwide, Democrats have managed to hold onto key Senate seats, notably Nevada's Senator Jackie Rosen, who narrowly defeated Republican Sam Brown by just over one percentage point (01:06). Another highlight is Arizona's Senate race, where Democratic Congressman Ruben Gallego leads over Republican Carrie Leake, with decision desks favoring Gallego, adding suspense to the final outcomes (01:31).

Costen raises a pivotal question: "In an election where Trump made gains in nearly every county nationwide, why didn't that translate to bigger wins for Republicans?" This query sets the agenda for her conversation with Burgess Everett.

---

Analyzing the Election Results with Burgess Everett (03:05 – 10:55)

Ticket Splitting and Republican Underperformance (03:14 – 05:40)

Burgess Everett addresses the phenomenon of ticket splitting, where voters support candidates from different parties within the same election. He points out that while Trump’s popularity surged nationally, it didn’t uniformly boost Republican candidates down the ballot. Everett notes:

“Republicans are on track to win just one of the five swing state Senate races. One. And that's by a hair too.” (02:04)

He explains that in several states, including Nevada and Michigan, Republican Senate candidates underperformed compared to Trump’s presidential results. This discrepancy suggests that Trump's appeal doesn’t seamlessly transfer to other Republican candidates, indicating a nuanced voter behavior where support for Trump doesn’t necessarily equate to blanket support for the GOP.

Implications for Future Elections (05:40 – 07:11)

Discussing the lessons for Democrats, Everett remains cautiously optimistic about the 2026 elections. He asserts:

“Democrats should probably be feeling like they could put themselves in a position to ride an anti-Trump wave in 2026.” (06:05)

Everett emphasizes that despite the Republicans holding a majority, the Democrats still possess strategic opportunities to leverage anti-Trump sentiments. He advises Democrats not to be entirely disheartened by the current Senate majority, highlighting the fluid nature of political dynamics and voter sentiments.

House Majority Dynamics (07:11 – 10:55)

Everett shifts focus to the House of Representatives, where Republicans are likely to maintain a slim majority. He attributes this to the erosion of the traditional gerrymandering advantages that previously favored Republicans, allowing Democrats to be more competitive in House races. He observes:

“The redistricting, slash, gerrymandering, whatever you want to call it, advantage for Republicans is basically gone.” (07:24)

This leveling of the playing field suggests a more balanced competition in the House, where both parties have equitable chances to secure seats, potentially leading to more dynamic legislative processes.

---

Republican Leadership and Future Agenda (10:55 – 15:48)

Internal Republican Struggles (13:42 – 15:48)

The conversation delves into the internal dynamics of the Republican Party post-election. Everett discusses the jockeying for leadership positions within the Senate and House, highlighting the tension between Trump-aligned factions and more establishment-oriented members.

He comments on the Senate race for Majority Leader, noting:

“Rick Scott, who I've long thought was the underdog, but is picking up more public support than I would have guessed.” (09:01)

Everett expresses concerns about Rick Scott’s ability to navigate Senate proceedings effectively, given his lack of prior experience compared to rivals like John Thune and John Cornyn. This leadership uncertainty poses potential challenges for the GOP in advancing Trump’s agenda within the Senate.

In the House, the uncertainty revolves around Speaker Mike Johnson's tenure and his capacity to maintain cohesion within a narrowly held majority. Everett suggests that while Johnson appears relatively secure, the slim margin underscores the fragility of Republican control, potentially hindering the passage of significant legislation.

---

Foreign Policy and National Security (15:48 – 20:15)

US Support for Ukraine (13:42 – 15:28)

Transitioning to foreign policy, Everett discusses the Biden administration’s continued support for Ukraine amidst ongoing tensions with Russia. He references National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan’s commitment to bolstering Ukraine’s defenses, stating:

“Our approach remains the same as it's been for the last two and a half years, which is to put Ukraine in the strongest possible position on the battlefield so that it is ultimately in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table.” (13:42)

Everett stresses the importance of allowing Ukraine to determine its own path to sovereignty and territorial integrity, emphasizing the role of the US and its allies in providing necessary support without imposing predetermined solutions.

Republican Foreign Policy Stance

Everett also touches upon the incoming Trump administration’s foreign policy, particularly concerning Ukraine. He notes the stark differences between Biden’s and Trump’s approaches, highlighting Trump’s inclination to swiftly end the conflict and his threat to cut off aid, which contrasts with the current administration’s strategy of sustained support to strengthen Ukraine’s negotiating position.

---

Domestic Issues and Political Discourse (15:28 – 20:15)

State-Level Political Maneuvering (15:28 – 17:11)

The discussion shifts to domestic politics, specifically California Governor Gavin Newsom’s initiative to fortify state laws against potential Trump administration policies. Everett comments on the strategic legislative sessions aimed at reinforcing state-level protections, despite national political turbulence.

Transgender Rights and Political Strategy (17:11 – 20:15)

A substantial portion of the episode is dedicated to the contentious debate over transgender rights and their politicization. Costen criticizes within the Democratic Party for blaming transgender advocacy for electoral losses, arguing that such scapegoating is unfounded and morally reprehensible. She rebukes the narrative that defending transgender individuals contributed to Kamala Harris’s defeat, pointing out the disconnect between such issues and the broader electorate’s priorities.

Everett reinforces this stance by highlighting the misalignment between niche political issues and the concerns of ordinary Americans, emphasizing:

“Running on these extraordinarily niche issues like gender fluidity or defunding the police... don’t actually matter, or frankly, feel profoundly out of touch to ordinary Americans.” (18:47)

He underscores the importance of focusing on issues that resonate with the electorate, rather than pandering to specific ideological factions that may not have widespread support.

---

Conclusion and Final Thoughts (20:15 – End)

In wrapping up the episode, both Costen and Everett reiterate the complexities of the current political climate. They acknowledge the multifaceted reasons behind electoral outcomes, including economic factors like inflation and the strategic missteps within party platforms. Everett calls for a pragmatic approach to future campaigns, urging Democrats to pivot towards universally resonant issues while advising Republicans to reconcile internal divisions and broaden their appeal beyond Trump’s base.

Costen emphasizes the importance of inclusive and representative political strategies, advocating against divisive rhetoric that alienates vulnerable communities. The episode concludes with a call for more grounded and responsive policymaking, aiming to bridge the gap between political elites and the everyday concerns of American citizens.

---

Notable Quotes:

• "Nevadan saw the truth." – Jackie Rosen (01:06)
• “Republicans are on track to win just one of the five swing state Senate races. One. And that's by a hair too.” – Burgess Everett (02:04)
• “Democrats should probably be feeling like they could put themselves in a position to ride an anti-Trump wave in 2026.” – Burgess Everett (06:05)
• “The redistricting... advantage for Republicans is basically gone.” – Burgess Everett (07:24)
• “It's wrong to cast a group of people to the wolves because you want to pick up more votes with people who actually don't care very much about trans people one way or the other.” – Burgess Everett (19:07)

---

This episode of What A Day provides a comprehensive analysis of the 2024 election results, dissecting the intricate dynamics between presidential influence and down-ballot races. Through insightful dialogue, Jane Costen and Burgess Everett explore the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead for both major political parties, offering listeners a nuanced understanding of the evolving American political landscape.

Transcript

[Jane Costen]

It's Monday, November 11th. Happy Veterans Day and thank you for your service. I'm Jane Costen and this is what a day. The show that is not happy to hear that more than 40 monkeys escaped a research facility in South Carolina. Look, I have some very simple rules. No caves and no cave diving. No climbing Everest and no monkeys. On today's show, the Biden administration will continue to send aid to Ukraine and trans people are not to blame for the Democrats loss. Let's get into it. We're starting to get a fuller picture of what the incoming Congress is going to look like under President elect Donald Trump. Republicans have clinched a majority in the Senate and seem poised to take the House too, as of our recording time, which is bad. But look under the hood of those Republican majorities and things start to get a little weird over the weekend. Nevada Democratic Senator Jackie Rosen officially won her race for reelection. She edged out Republican Sam Brown by a little more than a point. Rosen spoke to her supporters Saturday after she was declared the winner.

[Burgess Everett]

So it might have taken a few long days, a few long days, but Nevada voices have been heard. And you know, my opponents spent more than 75 million bucks, 75 million bucks against me to flip the seat. They spent tens of millions trying to tear me down, trying to tear us down, trying to lie about my record and turn me into something that I am not. But Nevadan saw the truth.

[Jane Costen]

There's only one Senate race left to call in Arizona, but there too Democratic Congressman Ruben Gallego is ahead of Republican Carrie Leake. Decision desk has called the race for Gallego, but the Associated Press is not whose results we use here at Crooked Speaking on election night, Gallego was confident he'd win. While we're still waiting for results to.

[Burgess Everett]

Come in, I believe that when all those ballots are counted and every Arizona's vote is counted, a poor Latino boy who grew up sleeping on the floor will be headed to the floor of.

[Jane Costen]

The United States Senate. Barring any drastic shifts in the vote still being counted, Republicans are on track to win just one of the five swing state Senate races. One. And that's by a hair too. The AP has called Pennsylvania's race for Republican Dave McCormick, but incumbent Democrat Bob Casey hasn't conceded. He says the race is still too close to call. With votes outstanding. The candidates are separated by about a half point and the race could go to a recount. Over in the House, the best case for Republicans is the status quo, a very slim majority of about four or five seats. We've all seen how that's been working out for them over the last two years. So in an election where Trump made gains in nearly every county nationwide, why didn't that translate to bigger wins for Republicans? To help me unpack that question, I talked to Burgess Everett. He's the Congressional bureau chief for Semaphore. We talked about ticket splitting, the Trump effect on down ballot races, and what Democrats can do with their existing Senate majority while they still have it. Burgess Everett, welcome to what a day.

[Jake Sullivan]

Thank you so much for having me, Jane.

[Jane Costen]

So Trump swept all seven swing states. So why didn't Republicans also sweep the five swing state Senate races?

[Jake Sullivan]

Yeah, I mean, this was something that we saw in the polls a little bit to a greater degree than what we actually saw in the results. But we saw these Democratic candidates running ahead of Trump in the polls, sometimes by five, seven, eight points. That did not happen on Election Day. But there were hints that there was going to be a different performance for Senate Democratic candidates than there was for Kamala Harris. What's interesting, though, is when you look at the data, and I was just reviewing this before we started talking, other than in Arizona, it's less of a Democratic overperformance than Harris. It was actually a case of Republican underperformance. There were tens of thousands of people in a bunch of these states, places like Nevada, places like Michigan and to a lesser extent Wisconsin, although it was still there, even though that race was very narrowly called where people voted for Donald Trump at president and then either didn't vote for a Senate candidate or voted for a third party candidate. And in these states that was what made the difference.

[Jane Costen]

Yeah. So it seems like people voted for Trump and then voted for Ruben Gallego or for Tammy Baldwin or they just didn't vote for anyone. So was it less a split ticket situation, as far as we know, or was it more that people just voted for Trump and just left the rest of the ballot blank? Is there any way to know?

[Jake Sullivan]

I mean, if you look at the raw candidate totals, you can tell that in Arizona there are people that voted both for Donald Trump and for Ruben Gallego. So. And that was suggested in the polls all along because he was whooping Kari Lake in the polls all along. Now, obviously that race has ended up being much closer than that. But we had a hint that there were going to be some Trump G voters elsewhere. I think that Harris and say Alyssa Slotkin, they are super close. They actually the Democratic candidates underperformed Kamala Harris just raw vote, total wise in a bunch of these states. But the Republicans underperformed Trump by a much greater degree. And even in states that Democrats lost, like Montana and Ohio, the Republican candidates ran way behind Trump in a way that could have made these seats actually closer if the presidential election had been closer. So I think if you look ahead to 2026, Republicans are going to have to figure out, you know, they have a Trump problem, but it's not the one that maybe we thought it was. We thought Trump maybe dragged these candidates down. That's not what's happening here. Trump is the strongest Republican on the ballot. Trump's popularity, his appeal, it's not 100% transferable.

[Jane Costen]

So what do you think the lessons are that Democrats should be taken from this? Because it does seem, in a weird way, it makes me feel a little bit more optimistic for 2026 when you have the fact that if you don't have Trump on the ballot, it seems like Republicans who have reimagined themselves as being very Trumpian candidates are underperforming. So is that a good thing for Democrats looking forward?

[Jake Sullivan]

Well, we should definitely see how the final Senate races turn out, because the margin is going to matter so much, because some of these states that Democrats will need to compete in are just super tough for them. Places like Iowa, Texas, Montana, places like that, those are going to be states where they need to get a majority. Ohio is going to have another Senate race now in 2026. But I do think Democrats should probably be feeling like they could put themselves in a position to ride an anti Trump wave in 2026. And we saw in 2018, Trump would campaign for a lot of these candidates that didn't end up winning and in 2022. So I don't think Democrats should be 1000% despondent about the Senate races. It's going to be a rough two years for them. But I do agree with your bottom line, which is that they should not be thinking they're totally out of the picture. And I think a lot of people are looking at maps right now and saying they're despondent. We have a ceiling, Democrats say on how many seats we can get, et cetera. Politics aren't static. These things change. So, you know, it's just too early to say that Democrats have no chance in 2026, even though Republicans holding 53ish seats makes it a lot harder.

[Jane Costen]

Republicans appear likely to also hold onto the House, though we don't know yet. But despite the national shift to the right, their majority would remain just a handful of seats, just as it is now. What do you attribute that to, you.

[Jake Sullivan]

Know, I think when I first started covering politics was more than a decade ago. Republicans had these redistricting advantages that seemed insurmountable in places like Ohio, Pennsylvania. They had huge advantages in their House delegations compared to where the party would perform in Senate races or the presidential race. I think that's flipped a little bit. You saw Democrats lose ground overall with Kamala Harris at the top of the ticket in a place like New York or New Jersey. But those candidates on the down ballot in the House races were able to flip some seats and hold tough seats at the same time. So what I think this tells us is the redistricting, slash, gerrymandering, whatever you want to call it, advantage for Republicans is basically gone. Democrats seem to be operating either on a neutral playing field or perhaps have an advantage because some of the numbers that I've seen suggest that raw vote, total wise Republican House candidates nationwide had more votes than Democratic candidates.

[Jane Costen]

We're already starting to see some jockeying among Republicans for majority Leader in the Senate and Speaker of the House. In the Senate, people more closely aligned with Trump and his beliefs or whatever, are pushing for Florida Senator Rick Scott over more establishment types. Though it's funny to say establishment in this time. Like, everybody's pretty Trumpy right now. And in the House, it's an open question whether Mike Johnson will be able to hold onto a speakership even if Republicans win the majority. What does all of this mean for the party's ability to push through Trump's agenda? Because we saw Mike Johnson is in his spot, because we went through like multiple conversations about this. So what does that mean for the future?

[Jake Sullivan]

I think Mike Johnson is probably relatively safe in comparison to what's going on in the Senate, where it's just a huge food fight right now. And so what does that mean for getting through his agenda? If Rick Scott, who I've long thought was the underdog, but is picking up more public support than I would have guessed, not just from outside voices, but from senators themselves, like Marco Rubio just endorsed him. You have him running against two, a current whip and a former whip. People who know how the Senate works, who know how to move things through the floor. I still think that's probably the best argument for a Republican to win an internal election. But, yeah, I do think if Rick Scott were to win, he may face a learning curve. He hasn't run the floor before and it would be more challenging. And I do think that's a reason why his rivals, John Thune, the current whip, and John Cornyn the former whip, are reminding people a lot about, hey, I've done this before, I know what I'm doing.

[Jane Costen]

And what are Democrats going to do between now and the new Year when the new Congress is sworn in to mitigate the effects of a second Trump presidency?

[Jake Sullivan]

Well, their options are somewhat limited. I think the most utility they can get is by confirming lifetime judicial appointments. You know, they can probably do a decent amount of those. It's limited by a calendar. It takes a couple days to do a single judge. So it's not like they can just do unlimited judges. There's also this is something Elizabeth Warren was talking about, confirming nominees whose appointments are a term rather than a presidency. Places like just off the top of my head that, you know, at the nlrb, places like that, where the appointments can last through another presidency. So those are some things that Democrats can do with their narrow majority. But they need everybody to show up, which is no easy feat when you're talking about Thanksgiving, you're talking about Christmas. So we just got to see how much of a grip Schumer can keep over the caucus to do all that. But it's pretty limited what they can do, to be honest with you.

[Jane Costen]

Burgess, thank you so much for joining me. This has been really helpful.

[Jake Sullivan]

Sure. Thank you, Jane.

[Jane Costen]

That was my conversation with Burgess Everett, the Congressional bureau chief for Semaphore. We'll get to more of the news in a moment, but if you like the show, make sure to subscribe, leave a 5 star review on Apple Podcasts and share with your friends. More to come after some ads. What a Day is brought to you by bookshop.org maybe you're searching for history that helps you make sense of this moment, or a novel that takes you out of it. Bookshop.org has you covered. Bookshop.org helps foster culture, curiosity and a love of reading for generations to come. Every purchase made directly supports local independent bookstores. Find your nearest shop with the bookstore map. Use code WAD to get 10% off your next order at bookshop.org crooked that's [e-mail] crooked for 10% off. Wadaday is brought to you by the Zero Emission Transportation Association Education Fund. The Zeta Education Fund wants Americans to know about the positive economic impact the EV and battery supply chain is having on our communities. Like how it's already created 240,000 jobs and attracted $177 billion of investment. More than a million EVs were sold in the US last year and there are currently over 200,000 public charging locations in the United States. Join forces with the Zeta Education Fund and help spread the facts about what a transition to EVs means for the future of America. Get on board@zeta zeta.org join what a day is brought to you by Sling Seems like things change every 20 minutes. It's hard to keep up. That's why you should watch Sling. They provide the best value for your essential news channels. With Sling, you get all of your favorite news channels at the best price. Fox News, CNN, MSNBC, Hannity, Anderson Cooper, 360, the Rachel Maddow show, and more for just $40 a month. So yeah, with the election coverage and everything else happening, you can get news that will raise your blood pressure at prices that won't. Get the best price on news about what's going on in the world. Then say that's what's going on in the world. And it's not just news. Check this out. Sling has the live sports, news and entertainment channels you love and less of the ones you don't. So you save hundreds of dollars. Sling lets you choose and customize your channel lineup so you can choose the channels you actually like. Sling's cloud DVR lets you record your shows to watch on your schedule. There's no complex technology, no long term contracts, and no hidden rigmarole. I need to be able to watch football and I need to be able to watch football on my schedule. That's why I love Sling. Get rewarded for watching your favorite news channels. Sling lets you do that. Visit sling.com now to learn more and get started. That's sling.com now sling.com now and now the news head of Lines.

[Burgess Everett]

Our approach remains the same as it's been for the last two and a half years, which is to put Ukraine in the strongest possible position on the battlefield so that it is ultimately in the strongest possible position at the negotiating table.

[Jane Costen]

National Security Adviser Jake Sullivan said on Face the Nation on Sunday that President Biden will back Ukraine until the end of his term. The remarks come just days before Biden and Trump are set to meet again. The two will talk at the White House on Wednesday to discuss foreign policy as the administration prepares to transfer power to the president elect. Last week, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky signaled that he and Trump aren't aligned in how to end Russia's years long invasion of his country. Trump has vowed to resolve the conflict quickly and threatened to cut off funding to Ukraine altogether. Sullivan said the US Will send all the military aid it can to Ukraine in the last 70 days of Biden's presidency and that the White House will encourage the incoming administration to do the same.

[Burgess Everett]

And it should be up to Ukraine to decide for its own sovereignty and its own territorial integrity when and how it goes to the negotiating table. It should be up to the United States and a coalition of nations that we have built to continue to supply Ukraine with the means to defend itself.

[Jane Costen]

White House officials told CNN on Sunday that Russia is readying tens of thousands of troops to reclaim the Ukrainian occupied Kursk region in the coming days. Ukrainian officials told the New York Times that Moscow has amassed 50,000 soldiers, including those from North Korea. California Governor Gavin Newsom has called for a special session of the state's legislature. His office told the Associated Press that Newsom and state lawmakers hope to Trump proof California state law. He spoke about the session during a livestream for his pac, Campaign for Democracy on Friday and said the session will focus on getting the California Department of Justice more funding in order to fight the Trump administration.

[Burgess Everett]

We're not going to shrink and we're not going to shy or fall prey to the rhetoric around demeaning and belittling vulnerable communities, scapegoating vulnerable communities. We're going to have their back. We're going to have your back. Even if you don't live in the state of California. We're going to have your back.

[Jane Costen]

The session will begin December 2, after newly elected state legislators take office. Donald Trump is building out his Cabinet wee, and he did make history with his first appointment. His campaign manager, Susie Wiles, will be his chief of staff. She'll be the first woman to serve in the role. You may not know Wiles by name, but she's credited as the architect of Trump's victory. She's a veteran political consultant from Florida, because of course, she is. She's known for her work on several winning Republican campaigns in the Sunshine State, including Senator Rick Scott and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis. We're still waiting to see who else will make Trump's cursed list of cronies besides tech billionaire Elon Musk and failed independent presidential candidate Robert F. Kennedy Jr. But the president elect made it clear on Truth Social who won't be part of his Cabinet. He wrote, quote, I will not be inviting former Ambassador Nick B. Haley or former Secretary of State Mike Pompeo to join the Trump administration, which is currently in formation. He added, of course, make America great again. Holiday season is officially upon us, and the Wicked movie adaptation is one of the most anticipated films of the season. For people who enjoyed getting defying gravity sung at them non consensually in high school. And with movies comes merch. The film's leading ladies, Ariana Grande and Cynthia Erivo, got a glimpse of the Mattel dolls of their character for the first time.

[Burgess Everett]

It's perfect.

[Jane Costen]

But it was not perfect. On Sunday, Target stores removed the dolls from shelves after shoppers realized Mattel apparently printed the name of a pornographic website on the packaging instead of the website for the movie. So if you're just dying for more information about Hollywood's recycled IP du jour that features a musical that annoys me, please make sure you go to wickedmovie.com and not just wicked.com because that website is not for musicals. And that's the news. One more thing. The intra Democratic blame game has picked up steam over the last couple of days, and we've heard a bunch of potential reasons why Kamala Harris didn't win the White House. It was inflation. It was misogyny. It was transgender people. Apparently transgender people, you know, are friends, coworkers, neighbors, aunts, uncles, spouses, teachers, and roughly less than 1% of the population are why Donald Trump won the White House. Well, to be clear, not transgender people. Just caring about them or discussing them at all. Despite the fact that it was Trump's campaign, not Harris's, that spent millions on anti trans messaging, a whole host of commentary has centered on the hypothesis that Democrats spent too much time defending trans people and that's somehow how they lost the White House. For example, Representative Seth Moulton told the New York Times that Democrats were too afraid of talking about trans girls, and it's always girls playing sports. And Barry Weiss of the Free Press argued on Fox News that being trans or non binary was an extraordinarily niche issue that ordinary Americans don't care about.

[Burgess Everett]

It turns out that running on these extraordinarily niche issues like gender fluidity or defunding the police, or any number of things that people in places where I live get extremely excited about, don't actually matter, or frankly, feel profoundly out of touch to ordinary Americans.

[Jane Costen]

Come the entire fuck on. This is a conversation. Well, less a conversation than a largely unhinged monologue that is entirely about cisgender people deciding that only elites care about trans people, that even thinking about trans people, trans rights, trans healthcare is an elite concern, despite the fact that trans people who live everywhere in the United States, by the way, and are more likely to live in poverty and more likely to deal with unemployment than CIS people. People like JD Vance even argue that being transgender is such an elite preoccupation that people are becoming trans to get into Ivy League schools.

[Burgess Everett]

If you are a middle class or upper middle class white parent and the only thing that you care about is whether your child goes into Harvard or Yale, obviously that pathway has become a lot harder for a lot of upper middle class kids. But the one way that those people can participate in the DEI bureaucracy in this country is to be trans. If you become trans, that is the way to reject your white privilege.

[Jane Costen]

By the way, I checked 0.2% of the 1,143 Yale students who responded to a survey question on the subject a few years ago. That 1,143 represented about 70% of the class of 2021 identified as trans. After some quick math that breaks down to two people. Yes, two, this is stupid. Especially since so much of it is coming from people who, you guessed it, think being trans is suspicious and bad in the first place. And we've got a hammer, everything looks like a nail. But also, this is irritatingly important because a wider strategy on the right is to say that a trans woman who works at a Starbucks in Iowa City is a coddled elite, while Elon Musk, the world's richest man who is currently setting up an estate in Texas so he can live alongside his kids and the women who gave birth to them is somehow just some ordinary everyday Joe elite doesn't mean anything if it never applies to the richest people alive and only applies to minorities. Some people decide to get mad at a few times a year and the people who care about them. We've been here before. Back in 2004, Karl Rove and the GOP wielded marriage equalities at cudgel and battleground states, including in my home state of Ohio. He helped put 11 anti marriage equality bills on the belt in a host of states, using that issue to drive right wing voters to the polls. And a whole bunch of terrified Democratic commentators used John Kerry's loss as proof that marriage equality was a poisonous issue that everyone needed to run away from as fast as humanly possible because everyday Americans don't support it. Twenty years later, 70% of Americans support marriage equality because Democrats, that's you and me, folks, not just the people around the party, didn't give up on it. There are lots of reasons why Kamala Harris lost the presidential election. I mean, inflation and I have more theories and so do you. But scapegoating trans people isn't it because it's not just untrue, it's morally wrong. It is wrong to cast a group of people to the wolves because you want to pick up more votes with people who actually don't care very much about trans people one way or or the other. It is wrong to argue that Democrats are elitists while ignoring the GOP elites currently figuring out how to make as much money as possible off a Trump presidency. And it is wrong to say that caring for and supporting our fellow Americans is ever the wrong thing to do, especially because of politics. That's all for today. If you like the show, make sure you subscribe, leave a review, maybe rewatch the Lord of the Rings movies and bothers someone you don't know about why the Scouring of the Shire wasn't included, and tell your friends to listen. And if you're into reading and not just about how monkeys have been known to commit murder like me, what it is also a nightly newsletter. Check it out and [e-mail] subscribe I'm Jane Costen and I must make it so clear. No monkeys. What a Day is a production of Crooked Media. It's recorded and mixed by Desmond Taylor. Our associate producer is Raven Yamamoto. Our producer is Michelle Eloy. We had production help today from Tyler Hill, Johanna Case, Joseph Dutra, Greg Walters and Julia Clare. Our senior producer is Erica Morrison and our executive producer is Adrian Hill. Our theme music is by Colin Gilliard and Kashaka.

[Burgess Everett]

Hey Fidelity how can I remember to invest every month? With the Fidelity app, you can choose a schedule and set up recurring investments in stocks and ETFs. Oh, that sounds easier than I thought. You got this? Yeah, I do.

[Jake Sullivan]

Now.

[Burgess Everett]

Where did I put my keys? You will find them where you left them.

[Jane Costen]

Investing involves risk, including risk of loss.

[Burgess Everett]

Fidelity Brokerage Services, LLC Member NYSE, SIPC NetCredit is here to say yes to a personal loan or line of credit when other lenders say no, apply in minutes and get a decision as soon soon as the same day if approved. Applications are typically funded the next business day or sooner. Loans offered by Netcredit or lending partner banks and serviced by Netcredit. Applications subject to review and approval. Learn [e-mail] partner netcredit credit to the people.