Latest / The Chuck ToddCast / Chuck’s Commentary- Are We Underestimating The Democratic Wave? + Pete Hegseth Is A Sick, Broken Man

Transcript

Chuck’s Commentary- Are We Underestimating The Democratic Wave? + Pete Hegseth Is A Sick, Broken Man · The Chuck ToddCast

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: This episode of the Chuck Todd cast is brought to
• 0:02
  Speaker 1: you by Chapter. Now, almost everything you hear about Medicare
• 0:06
  Speaker 1: is somebody quietly trying to steer you somewhere. And you're
• 0:11
  Speaker 1: skeptical of that, as you should be. I get it.
• 0:14
  Speaker 1: I mean, there's a federal lawsuit going on right now
• 0:17
  Speaker 1: over exactly this. Companies that branded themselves as unbiased while
• 0:21
  Speaker 1: allegedly pointing people toward whatever would pay them the most
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: as some sort of broker. So if your default is
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: to distrust everyone in this space, honestly, I get it.
• 0:31
  Speaker 1: I'm a bit distrustful these days myself. That's the whole
• 0:34
  Speaker 1: reason I want to tell you about Chapter. They're independent
• 0:37
  Speaker 1: Medicare advisors whose entire model is that their advisors are
• 0:41
  Speaker 1: not paid to push any one plan. They're just trying
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: to help. Yes, there's compensation that goes with it. but
• 0:47
  Speaker 1: it's across the board is what they're trying to do.
• 0:51
  Speaker 1: At the end of the day, they're advocating for you.
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: They're not the insurance companies themselves. They're an actual person
• 0:56
  Speaker 1: who actually goes through your doctors, your prescriptions, your needs,
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: and then compares them to every single plan available to
• 1:04
  Speaker 1: find the best one that will work for you and
• 1:06
  Speaker 1: hopefully save you a couple dollars too. And here's the
• 1:09
  Speaker 1: part that sets chapter apart. They don't disappear once you've
• 1:14
  Speaker 1: been in They will keep advocating for you. They're kind
• 1:17
  Speaker 1: of like almost like a concierge service. You're just there.
• 1:19
  Speaker 1: I need help. You're like customer service. You know, the plan,
• 1:22
  Speaker 1: you know, help me navigate this again. So you ever
• 1:24
  Speaker 1: get hit with a wrongful medical bill, they'll help you
• 1:28
  Speaker 1: fight it. They want to stay an advocate for you
• 1:31
  Speaker 1: even after you've done this. So look, I get it.
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: I think there's all sorts of space. You see a
• 1:38
  Speaker 1: lot of people are throwing themselves in this healthcare space.
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: What I like about these chapter folks, I've spent time
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: with them. This is a very transparent organization. It is
• 1:48
  Speaker 1: Medicare and all of its affiliated stuff can be very confusing.
• 1:53
  Speaker 1: The whole point of this is to make this easier
• 1:56
  Speaker 1: and less confusing. Okay, so look, take the skepticism you
• 2:00
  Speaker 1: already have in all of this, point it at your
• 2:02
  Speaker 1: own plan for 20 minutes. It's free. There's no pressure.
• 2:06
  Speaker 1: And then call chapter today at 980-734-4255. Hello there. I'm
• 2:19
  Speaker 1: Chuck Todd. Welcome to another episode of the Chuck Todd cast.
• 2:22
  Speaker 1: It is Monday. In some places, you're celebrating Columbus Day.
• 2:26
  Speaker 1: In some places, you're celebrating Indigenous Peoples Day. In some places,
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: everything is open. California, the DMV is open. Connecticut, the
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: DMV is closed. Stock market open. Banks closed. Bond market's
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: supposed to be closed. So basically, it's one of those
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: weird hybrid days. The best way to handle it is
• 2:46
  Speaker 1: today is catch up on your email day, right? It's
• 2:49
  Speaker 1: a quasi workday, quasi not. So this is the chance.
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: And it's one of those annoying days, right? On one hand,
• 2:56
  Speaker 1: you think you can get a lot done. On the
• 2:58
  Speaker 1: other hand, you can't get enough done because things aren't open.
• 3:02
  Speaker 1: But needless to say, I know for those of you,
• 3:04
  Speaker 1: it is one of those weird hybrid days on that front.
• 3:10
  Speaker 1: Let me give you a quick rundown of what we got. Look,
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: a lot has happened over the weekend. I've got sort
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: of where things stand with the midterms to kick things off.
• 3:20
  Speaker 1: But we've got some, as always, some disturbing developments inside
• 3:27
  Speaker 1: this Trump administration, particularly, again, attacking the press, this bizarre
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: decision to potentially live stream a public execution. Have we
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: become a dystopian movie from the 80s on that front?
• 3:43
  Speaker 1: And then, of course, perhaps the most grotesque decision of
• 3:47
  Speaker 1: the weekend, the decision by the United States to get
• 3:50
  Speaker 1: into bed with Putin on a diesel deal, although as
• 3:54
  Speaker 1: I was going to taping, the president is claiming there
• 3:56
  Speaker 1: is an energy ceasefire between Ukraine and Russia. But either way,
• 4:01
  Speaker 1: the signal sent by the the Russians against the Ukrainians.
• 4:09
  Speaker 1: Yet again, Donald Trump making a decision that literally the
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: rest of the country, the rest of his own party
• 4:15
  Speaker 1: disagrees with, only raising the questions that we all know
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: that you're asking yourself in your head. Geez, for somebody
• 4:23
  Speaker 1: that's supposedly not compromised by the Russians, he certainly does
• 4:29
  Speaker 1: a lot of their bidding. This is just a constant
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: cloud that will never go away because of his actual behavior.
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: It is Monday. I've got a time machine. I got
• 4:40
  Speaker 1: a great one for you presidential history junkies. That's all
• 4:44
  Speaker 1: I'm gonna say. All I'll say is that for this one,
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: you may wanna go get a six pack of the
• 4:50
  Speaker 1: best Canadian beer nobody talks about anymore, Moosehead. And that
• 4:56
  Speaker 1: hopefully gives you a clue about where I'm headed. I
• 4:59
  Speaker 1: got a lot to say about the college football weekend
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: and who might be the best teams in the country.
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: Here's a hint. I think the best two teams in
• 5:12
  Speaker 1: the country reside in states whose Senate races are not
• 5:15
  Speaker 1: top tier. And I'll just leave it at that. You'll
• 5:18
  Speaker 1: know which two teams I'm not referring to on that.
• 5:22
  Speaker 1: So yeah, it's a packed episode. Let me get started. Look,
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: Much of my weekend was distracted by a storm coming
• 5:30
  Speaker 1: to Pensacola. Pensacola Beach was right in the bullseye of,
• 5:35
  Speaker 1: I guess we're calling it Isaias is how we're supposed
• 5:39
  Speaker 1: to pronounce this storm's name. So I hope I have
• 5:43
  Speaker 1: that correct on this front. Look, I have a lot
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: of family, friends, and property in the line of fire there.
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: The good news is family and friends are good. Structures
• 5:55
  Speaker 1: are fixable. Basically, we dodged the worst parts of what
• 6:00
  Speaker 1: a hurricane can do, but now it's the annoying parts.
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: It's the cleanup. It's the lack of power. It's the
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: lack of roads being cleared, a lot of downed trees
• 6:10
  Speaker 1: in certain neighborhoods. It did take a slight right turn,
• 6:15
  Speaker 1: which just, I think, preserved Pensacola in general. Could have
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: been a super direct hit. It was not a super
• 6:21
  Speaker 1: direct hit. It was a little bit more closer to Destin,
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: for those of you keeping track of that. But I
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: am relieved that we're just dealing, in my large circle
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: of family down there, we are dealing with the annoying
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: property stuff. But it's just stuff. My mom always liked
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: to remind me whenever we dealt with this stuff and
• 6:43
  Speaker 1: she's lost her share of stuff over hurricanes over the years,
• 6:46
  Speaker 1: it's just stuff. Right. At the end of the day,
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: as long as everybody is physically sound, you do have
• 6:53
  Speaker 1: a roof over your head. And for that, we are
• 6:57
  Speaker 1: grateful on that front. Boy, what a what a you know,
• 7:00
  Speaker 1: this is a reminder, you know, it may not be
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: a busy year, but if a hurricane is coming to
• 7:05
  Speaker 1: your neighborhood, suddenly it was a pretty impactful hurricane season.
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: Reminds me of what happened to where I grew up
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: back during 1992 in Andrew. Andrew was a very, it
• 7:18
  Speaker 1: was a year of a fairly quiet storm year that year.
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: Took a long time to even get the first name Storm,
• 7:26
  Speaker 1: which happened to be Andrew. It's in late August. Ends
• 7:29
  Speaker 1: up being devastating. The point being is, I'm Always want
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: to be mindful. It's a slow hurricane season unless you're
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: in the line of fire, unless you had to deal
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: with one. Then it's it is not slow at all.
• 7:45
  Speaker 1: Sad about the White Sox. It's a bummer. Couldn't win
• 7:50
  Speaker 1: one game at home, guys. One game. But it was
• 7:54
  Speaker 1: pretty clear there was a pitching disparity. And the one
• 7:57
  Speaker 1: thing about the Guardians is that they have tried to
• 7:59
  Speaker 1: build their team for the playoffs. So White Sox kind
• 8:02
  Speaker 1: of stumbled into the playoffs and just didn't have their arms.
• 8:05
  Speaker 1: And as you know, they do. I think this Guardians-Rays
• 8:08
  Speaker 1: series may not have the sexy names. It's going to
• 8:12
  Speaker 1: be a good series, just like Brewers-Dodgers. It's going to
• 8:14
  Speaker 1: be a good series. I just love playoff baseball. The intensity,
• 8:18
  Speaker 1: the nervousness, even when I don't really have a team
• 8:21
  Speaker 1: that I'm totally pulling for here. It is the drama
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: is amazing. But look, I'll have a lot more to
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: say in my little sports section when we get there. So, look,
• 8:34
  Speaker 1: we're a little more than three weeks away from Election Day.
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: And I want to start by updating where I think
• 8:38
  Speaker 1: we are in this election, because the evidence continues to
• 8:41
  Speaker 1: accumulate that we're looking at a potentially significant repudiation of
• 8:46
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump and the Republican Party. It is not a
• 8:49
  Speaker 1: case of whether the Democrats are going to have a
• 8:50
  Speaker 1: good night. The question is, how bad of a night
• 8:53
  Speaker 1: are Republicans going to have? Is this a full-on repudiation
• 8:57
  Speaker 1: election that borders on realignment, at least inside the Republican Party, right?
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: A vote of no confidence in the direction that Donald
• 9:06
  Speaker 1: Trump and the MAGA wing has led the Republican Party,
• 9:09
  Speaker 1: because you're seeing it across the board, right? The vulnerability
• 9:12
  Speaker 1: of Greg Abbott is not just about Donald Trump. It's
• 9:14
  Speaker 1: about Republican governance, right? Republican governance... is on the ballot.
• 9:18
  Speaker 1: There is no coherent Democratic agenda that's being floated here
• 9:24
  Speaker 1: across the board. What this is, is, hey, these guys
• 9:27
  Speaker 1: are breaking stuff. These guys are doing things that aren't
• 9:30
  Speaker 1: working anymore. It's time to toss them out. And that
• 9:34
  Speaker 1: is essentially the through line that unites these Democratic campaigns.
• 9:39
  Speaker 1: But none of these Democratic campaigns are advocating essentially what
• 9:43
  Speaker 1: they would do. And that's intentional. That's what midterm elections are.
• 9:46
  Speaker 1: In many cases, they really are unchecked on the party
• 9:49
  Speaker 1: in power. And look, we've been talking for weeks now.
• 9:51
  Speaker 1: There's an expanding Senate map, the possibility of Democrats winning
• 9:56
  Speaker 1: races in places where they haven't won in almost 100 years. Hello, Kansas.
• 10:01
  Speaker 1: And this unusual dynamic of Democratic candidates in red states
• 10:04
  Speaker 1: finding ways to separate themselves from their national party, while
• 10:07
  Speaker 1: Republican candidates seem almost afraid to separate themselves from Donald Trump.
• 10:13
  Speaker 1: And nothing I've seen over the last week or last
• 10:15
  Speaker 1: few days has changed that assessment. If anything, the latest
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: evidence only reinforces it. The unknown is just what's going
• 10:24
  Speaker 1: to happen to this Republican base. Will they turn out
• 10:26
  Speaker 1: or not? And how many of them will skip certain
• 10:31
  Speaker 1: Senate races or Gov races because they can't bring themselves
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: to vote for a Democrat, but they can't bring themselves
• 10:37
  Speaker 1: to reelect this mess. We have a new national poll.
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: that I thought was the one that I think provides
• 10:45
  Speaker 1: some really stable data, good data to look at. This
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: one is from the Pew Research Center. Yes, this is
• 10:50
  Speaker 1: on my approved national poll list of ones that are
• 10:53
  Speaker 1: worth going through. Pew is part of that list. The
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: NBC News poll when it's hardback and turf. Fox News'
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: national poll when it's just a bipartisan team. And Time
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: Sienna when it is what they're doing there. Look, it
• 11:08
  Speaker 1: Out of Pew, the generic ballot in some ways was
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: just telling you where things are. Democrats lead by eight points.
• 11:16
  Speaker 1: That's in line with what we've seen. Trump's approval rating
• 11:19
  Speaker 1: in Pew was down to 30%. This is among the
• 11:23
  Speaker 1: lowest we've seen yet, 68% disapproving. One thing about Pew
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: is Pew has a track record of they'll go somewhere
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: you're like, hmm, we haven't seen it that low in
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: a trusted national poll. I think I've seen some 31s
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: or 32s. A lot of times, once you see Pew
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: hit it, you'll start to see some others get it.
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: But that's not what makes this poll the most interesting.
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: What caught my attention is what happens when Pew took
• 11:49
  Speaker 1: a look at which voters are paying the most attention,
• 11:52
  Speaker 1: which voters are motivated, and which voters think the outcome
• 11:55
  Speaker 1: of this election really matters. Because it gives you a
• 11:58
  Speaker 1: taste of the engagement aspect of this. And in midterm elections,
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: engagement matters a lot, right? Presidential elections, even the unengaged
• 12:06
  Speaker 1: will show up. That does not happen in midterm elections.
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: This is one of the things I've been trying to
• 12:14
  Speaker 1: get at and discuss in the possibility of this wave.
• 12:16
  Speaker 1: It's not simply whether Democrats have this seven or eight
• 12:18
  Speaker 1: point lead nationally. It's whether people want to send a
• 12:21
  Speaker 1: message to the president, whether how much more motivated they
• 12:25
  Speaker 1: are to participate than the people who want to defend them.
• 12:28
  Speaker 1: And this poll suggests there is a substantial difference between
• 12:31
  Speaker 1: these two groups. Now, before we get into the numbers,
• 12:35
  Speaker 1: there's a larger political question I want you to keep
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: in the back of your mind throughout my entire monologue today,
• 12:42
  Speaker 1: because it's sort of in three parts, but it all
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: has connective tissue. I've been struck by how much of
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: what this administration has done lately seems driven by almost
• 12:53
  Speaker 1: a reflexive need to demonstrate strength, almost so much so
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: that they don't care about the downside of that demonstration.
• 13:04
  Speaker 1: Every problem produces another confrontation. Every setback produces another threat
• 13:10
  Speaker 1: from Trump. Every criticism seems to require some sort of retaliation.
• 13:15
  Speaker 1: And we sort of see on every day, one of
• 13:17
  Speaker 1: those three things are part of the president's agenda, which
• 13:21
  Speaker 1: couldn't be more off message for what Republicans on the
• 13:24
  Speaker 1: ballot need to have from the leader of their party.
• 13:27
  Speaker 1: And I'm wondering whether what the president and his administration
• 13:29
  Speaker 1: believe looks like strength is beginning to look a lot
• 13:31
  Speaker 1: more like desperation, right? You remember those Chinese finger traps, right?
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: Those little woven tubes. You put your fingers into them
• 13:40
  Speaker 1: and the harder you pulled them out, the tighter they become.
• 13:44
  Speaker 1: It's kind of the metaphor I want you to have
• 13:46
  Speaker 1: in your head today as I go through this. I
• 13:48
  Speaker 1: think it's an increasingly useful way to understand what we're watching.
• 13:51
  Speaker 1: The administration keeps pulling harder. And it keeps finding itself
• 13:55
  Speaker 1: in another predicament. We'll get into some of these examples
• 13:58
  Speaker 1: in a minute, particularly this Russia diesel agreement, the administration's, frankly,
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: ridiculous pressure that's being put on Ukraine, who's been attacked
• 14:08
  Speaker 1: by Russia and invaded by them. And of course, the
• 14:11
  Speaker 1: Pete Hanks proposal to live stream an execution. But let's
• 14:16
  Speaker 1: start with the voters, because they're the ones who ultimately
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: are going to get to render a judgment on all
• 14:21
  Speaker 1: of this. And among voters who say they've given a
• 14:23
  Speaker 1: lot of thought about this election, according to Pew, Democrats
• 14:27
  Speaker 1: lead by 24 points. All right. That's the enthusiasm difference, right?
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: That's the, they'll crawl on broken glass. I'm taping in
• 14:36
  Speaker 1: the middle of a rainstorm right now. It's the remnants
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: of East IAS, I believe. And guess what? If it's
• 14:41
  Speaker 1: pouring rain, Democrats are showing up. What this number tells you,
• 14:45
  Speaker 1: if it's pouring rain, Republicans may not. Among voters who
• 14:48
  Speaker 1: are extremely motivated to vote, Democrats lead by 24 points, 59-35.
• 14:53
  Speaker 1: And among voters who say it really matters which party
• 14:56
  Speaker 1: controls Congress, Democrats lead by 15 points, 53-38. Now, again,
• 15:01
  Speaker 1: the overall Democratic advantage was eight points. But among the
• 15:04
  Speaker 1: people who are paying the closest attention, among the people
• 15:07
  Speaker 1: telling pollsters they're really motivated, the advantage becomes considerably larger.
• 15:12
  Speaker 1: And it gets at something that if we're off on
• 15:15
  Speaker 1: this There's an you know, I know there's a lot
• 15:19
  Speaker 1: of chatter on the right that says, hey, Democrats have
• 15:21
  Speaker 1: been here before. They're overrating things. And I'm going to
• 15:23
  Speaker 1: get to a couple of those points in a minute.
• 15:26
  Speaker 1: Here's every chance that it's being under. We are underestimating
• 15:31
  Speaker 1: the size of this way, because I think a lot
• 15:32
  Speaker 1: of pollsters are waiting up the Republican number, even when
• 15:36
  Speaker 1: they're not getting the responses that they expected to get.
• 15:39
  Speaker 1: And that and that's that is that is going to
• 15:43
  Speaker 1: mask any sort of gigantic shift. I've been convinced that
• 15:49
  Speaker 1: it's possible we're missing something in Texas because of this,
• 15:54
  Speaker 1: because there's such a history that there's almost a weighting
• 15:57
  Speaker 1: up of the opposition because we just can't believe how
• 16:01
  Speaker 1: few respondents we're getting. And maybe they're not talking to
• 16:04
  Speaker 1: anybody at all. That's fair. Maybe they don't want to
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: give away their vote. Maybe there's that distrustful. I'm sure
• 16:10
  Speaker 1: there's some voters that are behaving that way. But this
• 16:14
  Speaker 1: is one of those where you're like, huh. If all
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: the estimates are 20 to 30 seats, we're seeing double
• 16:20
  Speaker 1: digit in paying attention, enthusiasm. Could we be underestimating this?
• 16:26
  Speaker 1: I am as equally, I'm almost more concerned we're underestimating
• 16:30
  Speaker 1: at this point in prognostication land than we are overestimating.
• 16:36
  Speaker 1: And in fact, if you look at these Pew numbers,
• 16:38
  Speaker 1: it's really interesting if you compare it to the 2022
• 16:41
  Speaker 1: midterm and the Biden midterm. Four years ago, when Republicans
• 16:44
  Speaker 1: were trying to take back Congress, right, from Joe Biden's party,
• 16:48
  Speaker 1: the most engaged voters were evenly divided. And in some cases,
• 16:52
  Speaker 1: they leaned Republican. Now, remember, Democratic voters had motivation over
• 16:56
  Speaker 1: the Dobbs decision. So it sort of artificially boosted the
• 17:00
  Speaker 1: Democratic number in a midterm year where their party's in power.
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: But it was still a level playing field at best
• 17:06
  Speaker 1: with a slight Republican advantage. There's no slight anything on
• 17:10
  Speaker 1: this one. This time, voters expressing the greatest interest are
• 17:13
  Speaker 1: disproportionately supporting Democrats. Now, look, it's not a likely voter
• 17:18
  Speaker 1: model and they're measuring registered voters and asking them about
• 17:21
  Speaker 1: interest and motivation. And again, you can hold your nose
• 17:25
  Speaker 1: and vote for somebody you're not interested in. And still
• 17:28
  Speaker 1: that vote counts the same as somebody who jumps up
• 17:30
  Speaker 1: and down and slam dumps their ballot into the box. Right.
• 17:34
  Speaker 1: But engagement matters when it's raining. Enthusiasm matters when there's
• 17:39
  Speaker 1: suddenly an extra hurdle to vote. And that's worth a
• 17:43
  Speaker 1: couple of points somewhere down the line. Hey, this episode
• 17:49
  Speaker 1: of the Chuck Todd cast is brought to you by Ethos. Look,
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: let me tell you about life insurance. As you know,
• 17:55
  Speaker 1: Ethos is an incredible portal for helping you find the
• 17:59
  Speaker 1: right life insurance policy. I'm a huge believer in life insurance.
• 18:02
  Speaker 1: I wouldn't have gotten to college in Washington, D.C. without
• 18:05
  Speaker 1: life insurance. My father had a policy buried somewhere that
• 18:08
  Speaker 1: we discovered, and it wasn't a lot of money, but
• 18:11
  Speaker 1: it was an important bucket of money at a time
• 18:15
  Speaker 1: that my mother, newly widowed, single mom, Me, I'm 16.
• 18:20
  Speaker 1: It was of enormous, enormous help at that time. And
• 18:25
  Speaker 1: this is why I believe in life insurance. You don't
• 18:28
  Speaker 1: know what could happen to you on any given day.
• 18:30
  Speaker 1: This is literally an insurance policy for that. So let
• 18:34
  Speaker 1: me tell you a little bit about Ethos. Ethos makes
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: getting life insurance fast and easy. It's 100% online. You
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: get a quote in seconds, you apply in minutes, and
• 18:41
  Speaker 1: you can get coverage the same day you begin this process.
• 18:44
  Speaker 1: There's no medical exam. You just answer a few simple
• 18:46
  Speaker 1: health questions. You can get up to $ 3 million in coverage.
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: Some policies are as low as $ 30 a month. And
• 18:51
  Speaker 1: you'll get your lowest rate from their network of trusted carriers.
• 18:55
  Speaker 1: Ethos has gotten 4.9 out of 5 stars on Trustpilot
• 18:59
  Speaker 1: with over 5,500 reviews. So, take 10 minutes to get
• 19:03
  Speaker 1: covered today. Life insurance through Ethos. Get your free quote
• 19:07
  Speaker 1: at ethos.com slash chuck. That is E-T-H-O-S dot com slash chuck.
• 19:13
  Speaker 1: Application times may vary. The rates may vary. That Trustpilot
• 19:17
  Speaker 1: rating was as of August of 2026. But there's something
• 19:25
  Speaker 1: else in this poll that's worth looking at. If you
• 19:27
  Speaker 1: looked at people whose participation in the 2024 election, they
• 19:32
  Speaker 1: were able to validate on a voter file. Meaning, right?
• 19:34
  Speaker 1: So they confirmed the participation. And among people who voted
• 19:37
  Speaker 1: for Kamala Harris in 2024, 87% say they're supporting Democratic
• 19:41
  Speaker 1: congressional candidates this year. Among people who voted for Donald Trump,
• 19:45
  Speaker 1: only 77% say they're supporting Republicans. Now, what's that disparity?
• 19:51
  Speaker 1: Two words, Latino voters, folks. And this is going to
• 19:55
  Speaker 1: be the mistake that they took with the dummy manders
• 19:58
  Speaker 1: in Florida and Texas, with this assumption that their improvement
• 20:05
  Speaker 1: with Latino voters across the board, across classes, all those things,
• 20:10
  Speaker 1: was somehow some permanent thing. That is the biggest, biggest note.
• 20:14
  Speaker 1: And the other one is younger voters who were not
• 20:16
  Speaker 1: sold on the Democratic Party. Some of them skipped, et cetera.
• 20:19
  Speaker 1: But that's your big gap here. That's the 10 point
• 20:22
  Speaker 1: difference between the two coalitions. Now we'll see, right? Some
• 20:26
  Speaker 1: of those people that supported Trump in 24 may not
• 20:29
  Speaker 1: vote at all. Some of them may vote third party
• 20:31
  Speaker 1: and some of them may cross over, particularly the Latino voters.
• 20:36
  Speaker 1: And that was a significant finding in this one. And
• 20:44
  Speaker 1: about a quarter of each of the 2024 presidential coalition
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: now has an unfavorable view of the party they supported. Now,
• 20:50
  Speaker 1: this was interesting. So for instance, among Trump voters who
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: disliked the Republican Party, only 49% say they're voting Republican
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: for Congress. And I remember this was one in four
• 21:02
  Speaker 1: Trump voters overall. Now, this isn't surprising. We know Trump
• 21:06
  Speaker 1: in 2024 accumulated some supporters that he'd never had before,
• 21:10
  Speaker 1: particularly Latinos. So this shouldn't be surprising, but it's a
• 21:16
  Speaker 1: reminder how Trump has lost all of these new voters
• 21:19
  Speaker 1: he accumulated in 24. Now, among Harris voters who disliked
• 21:24
  Speaker 1: the Democratic Party, 73% of those voters say they're going
• 21:29
  Speaker 1: to support the Democratic Party, right? This is This is
• 21:32
  Speaker 1: this unique thing we've been running into that I keep
• 21:35
  Speaker 1: bringing up where Democrats are unpopular, more unpopular than the Republicans.
• 21:39
  Speaker 1: Part of that is because Democrats are angry at Democrats,
• 21:42
  Speaker 1: more of them. But it isn't lowering their engagement in
• 21:46
  Speaker 1: this election. This is a bit of an FU election
• 21:49
  Speaker 1: for some of these Democrats. They may not like what's
• 21:51
  Speaker 1: happening with the base of the Democratic Party, but they're
• 21:53
  Speaker 1: not going to help Team MAGA either. So it gets
• 22:00
  Speaker 1: you and then You know, this gets you at another
• 22:04
  Speaker 1: way to slice this pew, Daniel. Only 36% of those
• 22:08
  Speaker 1: disaffected Trump voters say the outcome of this election really matters.
• 22:13
  Speaker 1: But among those disaffected Harris voters, the ones that don't
• 22:16
  Speaker 1: like the party but supported Harris, 65% said the outcome
• 22:20
  Speaker 1: of this election matters. So basically, you've got a whole
• 22:23
  Speaker 1: bunch of skeptical Democratic Harris voters who are like, look,
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: I have no new faith in this Democratic Party. But
• 22:30
  Speaker 1: I'm voting against those guys versus the Republicans who don't
• 22:35
  Speaker 1: have faith in this party going, it's not worth it.
• 22:39
  Speaker 1: And that's how waves grow exponentially. One side continues to
• 22:44
  Speaker 1: be more enthusiastic and shows up for a variety of reasons.
• 22:47
  Speaker 1: And it's an against election. And the other side doesn't.
• 22:50
  Speaker 1: So this is just yet another way of showing the
• 22:56
  Speaker 1: direction of this election. And remember, the Democrats have the
• 22:58
  Speaker 1: easy argument here. They're not running on some grand unified
• 23:02
  Speaker 1: national agenda. Their candidates are often trying to separate themselves
• 23:06
  Speaker 1: from what you might think is the national democratic brand.
• 23:08
  Speaker 1: You should see the anti-trans ad that Annie Andrews in
• 23:12
  Speaker 1: South Carolina is running, making it clear she's never performed
• 23:14
  Speaker 1: gender affirming surgeries, doesn't believe in it, and is against
• 23:18
  Speaker 1: trans women participating in women's sports. And she did it
• 23:22
  Speaker 1: direct to camera. You've seen a lot of these red states.
• 23:27
  Speaker 1: Democrats push back on some of these cultural issues that
• 23:29
  Speaker 1: they think go a bit too far. But Democratic voters
• 23:33
  Speaker 1: appear to have a fairly clear idea of what they
• 23:35
  Speaker 1: want on this election. They don't have an agenda they're
• 23:39
  Speaker 1: looking to propose. They simply want to see a brake
• 23:42
  Speaker 1: pedal on Donald Trump, a check on his power, some
• 23:45
  Speaker 1: form of accountability, stop the sort of olaying of anything
• 23:50
  Speaker 1: he wants to do. And And then this is where
• 23:56
  Speaker 1: the Republicans who maybe think that Trump deserves a check,
• 23:59
  Speaker 1: they can't bring themselves to vote Democratic. So what are
• 24:01
  Speaker 1: they going to do? They're not going to defend a
• 24:03
  Speaker 1: Republican Congress. They're just not going to show up. And
• 24:06
  Speaker 1: they have one other number that might explain this. 44%
• 24:08
  Speaker 1: of registered voters say they're casting their congressional vote against Trump. 19%
• 24:13
  Speaker 1: say they're casting their vote for him. They're pretending he's
• 24:17
  Speaker 1: on the ballot, right? Compare that to 2022, 36% said
• 24:19
  Speaker 1: they were voting against Biden, 19% said they were voting
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: for him. The anti-president vote is eight points higher now
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: than it was in 2022. I mean, that's just everything. People, 84%
• 24:33
  Speaker 1: of registered voters say the economy is very important to
• 24:36
  Speaker 1: their vote. 88% of Democratic supporters versus 82% of Republican supporters.
• 24:41
  Speaker 1: So universal agreement there. People are worried about the cost
• 24:44
  Speaker 1: of living, energy prices, and where this war is going.
• 24:49
  Speaker 1: All right. Keep that in mind as we go through
• 24:50
  Speaker 1: the rest of today's stories. Because this is a political
• 24:53
  Speaker 1: environment which the president is making decisions and voters know it.
• 24:57
  Speaker 1: And there is no separate Republicans, no matter what they're trying.
• 25:02
  Speaker 1: Many of them haven't done a good job of trying
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: to separate themselves from the president. A handful have tried.
• 25:06
  Speaker 1: But it may be impossible to do it because Trump's
• 25:09
  Speaker 1: going out of his way not to do it. So
• 25:12
  Speaker 1: let's talk about the Senate a little bit. We've got
• 25:13
  Speaker 1: plenty of time discussing how the map has expanded. So
• 25:16
  Speaker 1: I'm not going to go through every race again. But boy,
• 25:19
  Speaker 1: has the conversation changed. Democratic leaders are openly talking about
• 25:22
  Speaker 1: ending up with 52 seats. They're assuming they net five seats,
• 25:27
  Speaker 1: not just North Carolina and Maine. They're basically looking at
• 25:30
  Speaker 1: the map and saying Alaska, Ohio, Texas, Kansas, Iowa, North Carolina, Maine.
• 25:35
  Speaker 1: They believe they're going to win five of those seven.
• 25:37
  Speaker 1: I think they're right. North Carolina, Alaska, Ohio, Texas. Those
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: four feel like Democrats have the advantage between Kansas, Iowa
• 25:46
  Speaker 1: and Maine. One would assume they're going to win one
• 25:50
  Speaker 1: of those three, and that gives them their net of five.
• 25:55
  Speaker 1: Do they sweep them all? It's not crazy that they
• 25:59
  Speaker 1: get all seven, and they net that, and they end
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: up at 54 seats. I can't imagine 55 that would
• 26:08
  Speaker 1: bring in Nebraska or South Carolina or Mississippi. That's the
• 26:14
  Speaker 1: next three on the list, so it's hard to see that.
• 26:19
  Speaker 1: And then, of course, you just don't know what happens
• 26:21
  Speaker 1: in Michigan, right? It is pretty clear. What's interesting about
• 26:25
  Speaker 1: Michigan is the fact that it's still a race. Abdul
• 26:28
  Speaker 1: El-Sayed is not put this away. Any other Democrat likely
• 26:33
  Speaker 1: would have this race put away by now in this environment.
• 26:36
  Speaker 1: How do we know this? Just look at other swing,
• 26:38
  Speaker 1: pure swing states, right? Michigan, North Carolina, and Georgia, those
• 26:43
  Speaker 1: three have more in common, right? Those are the, and
• 26:46
  Speaker 1: where do we sit? Look at New Hampshire. Democrat is
• 26:49
  Speaker 1: up with a more comfortable margin. So now the other
• 26:54
  Speaker 1: theory I have is in some of these blue or, or, or,
• 26:57
  Speaker 1: or blue leaning state, I guess you could argue Michigan
• 27:00
  Speaker 1: is closer to being Minnesota than it is North Carolina,
• 27:02
  Speaker 1: but I vacillate, you know, Trump did carry it two
• 27:05
  Speaker 1: out of three times, but I do vacillate between that.
• 27:08
  Speaker 1: Is it closer to North Carolina? Is it closer to,
• 27:10
  Speaker 1: to Minnesota? Right. Um, But that's a wild card, and
• 27:16
  Speaker 1: that would certainly upend things. And then Jacob Rabashkin, who,
• 27:21
  Speaker 1: of course, is over from Inside Elections, notes that a
• 27:24
  Speaker 1: pop-up super PAC showed up in Ohio promoting a third-party
• 27:29
  Speaker 1: socialist candidate named Greg Levy. And the posters, send a
• 27:35
  Speaker 1: worker to the Senate, vote Greg Levy. And this is
• 27:37
  Speaker 1: an Ohio effort. The point being is You're starting to
• 27:42
  Speaker 1: see some of this Republican super PAC money out of nowhere.
• 27:46
  Speaker 1: You're seeing a promotion of a third party candidate, a
• 27:49
  Speaker 1: lefty third party candidate in Nebraska. I'm seeing this. I'm
• 27:52
  Speaker 1: seeing a lefty third party promotion there now in Ohio.
• 27:55
  Speaker 1: And I think you may see more of that in
• 27:57
  Speaker 1: the next couple of weeks. The question I have is
• 28:00
  Speaker 1: how many will any of the Democratic super PACs attempt
• 28:05
  Speaker 1: to do this, say, in a Mississippi, say, in a Kansas, frankly,
• 28:09
  Speaker 1: in Iowa? even at Texas, because in all of those cases,
• 28:12
  Speaker 1: you do have a libertarian candidate. On Wednesday, I'm going
• 28:15
  Speaker 1: to take a look at the size of these ballots,
• 28:17
  Speaker 1: and we're going to go into these seven Senate races
• 28:20
  Speaker 1: that are, you know, and frankly, I'll probably expand it
• 28:22
  Speaker 1: to all 10, and we're going to take a look
• 28:24
  Speaker 1: at the realistic sort of bank shot strategies of trying
• 28:31
  Speaker 1: to do this. And so we'll put a pin in that,
• 28:36
  Speaker 1: and I'll give you more on that on Wednesday. My
• 28:38
  Speaker 1: friend Bruce Melman, had a particularly useful chart on Senate
• 28:42
  Speaker 1: races over the weekend, his six-chart Sunday. If you don't subscribe,
• 28:45
  Speaker 1: you're doing yourself a disservice. Go on Substack. It's a freebie.
• 28:49
  Speaker 1: He went back and looked at the biggest polling misses
• 28:51
  Speaker 1: in October Senate polling averages in individual states over recent
• 28:56
  Speaker 1: election cycles. And you have to do it over recent
• 28:58
  Speaker 1: election cycles because we didn't really have enough in the
• 29:01
  Speaker 1: 20th century to do analysis like this. And I'm always
• 29:05
  Speaker 1: a little skeptical of these analysis because there is a
• 29:07
  Speaker 1: lot of crappy polling. I'm trying to keep it PG-13.
• 29:11
  Speaker 1: It's a lot of crappy polling, particularly on the state level,
• 29:14
  Speaker 1: that too many of these polling aggregation sites treat as
• 29:18
  Speaker 1: if they're the equal of a really quality poll from
• 29:21
  Speaker 1: AARP or Fox News or something like that. But it
• 29:24
  Speaker 1: is interesting and worth noting in Bruce's chart, eight of
• 29:27
  Speaker 1: the 11 Democratic leads he examined are smaller than the
• 29:31
  Speaker 1: largest October polling miss in those states since 2014. What
• 29:35
  Speaker 1: does that mean? It means... the Democrats don't have a
• 29:38
  Speaker 1: lead that's bigger than the worst polling miss that took
• 29:44
  Speaker 1: place in competitive races in that state essentially this century.
• 29:48
  Speaker 1: Kansas had the biggest one in there, and it goes
• 29:51
  Speaker 1: back to a 2014 where in October, the independent slash
• 29:55
  Speaker 1: Democratic candidate pulled even, ended up losing by double digits,
• 30:00
  Speaker 1: but that race was different in that Republican. You had
• 30:03
  Speaker 1: Pat Roberts was also asleep at the switch, just like
• 30:05
  Speaker 1: Roger Marshall. He woke up and then just simply ran
• 30:09
  Speaker 1: against his opponent as a Democrat with the Democrat in
• 30:11
  Speaker 1: the White House. But there's no Democrat in the White
• 30:13
  Speaker 1: House this time. So I think it is harder to,
• 30:17
  Speaker 1: this is why I think it was easier for Fisher
• 30:20
  Speaker 1: to get out of her bind with Dan Osborne last
• 30:22
  Speaker 1: cycle because Biden was in the White House, harder for
• 30:25
  Speaker 1: Pete Ricketts to get out of this bind in Nebraska
• 30:28
  Speaker 1: because he's defending Trump in the White House. Ditto with
• 30:30
  Speaker 1: Roger Marshall. But it is worth noting that 2014, the
• 30:34
  Speaker 1: last time we sort of were here with a Kansas
• 30:37
  Speaker 1: Senate race at this point in time, it ended up
• 30:41
  Speaker 1: being a huge miss. Now, it doesn't mean that polls
• 30:44
  Speaker 1: are going to miss by 15 points this cycle. I
• 30:46
  Speaker 1: think a lot of pollsters are trying to make sure
• 30:48
  Speaker 1: they don't mess up this time. And again, 2014, you
• 30:52
  Speaker 1: had an enthusiastic Republican base, and it generally even if
• 30:55
  Speaker 1: you had an unenthusiastic list of supporters for Pat Roberts
• 30:58
  Speaker 1: in Kansas specifically. But it is a reminder that polling
• 31:02
  Speaker 1: averages are not election results and polling averages are there
• 31:05
  Speaker 1: to mislead you. Don't get caught up in the polling averages.
• 31:10
  Speaker 1: It can mislead as much as you think it's giving
• 31:13
  Speaker 1: you interesting information. Now, I have two historical curiosities I
• 31:20
  Speaker 1: discovered over the weekend. One from my friend Kirk Beto.
• 31:24
  Speaker 1: over at the Hotline, something he shared with me in
• 31:26
  Speaker 1: a Newsphere interview. Please check out Newsphere, as you know.
• 31:33
  Speaker 1: My show is on there. I hope you've, if you
• 31:36
  Speaker 1: want to take a look, I have deep dive interviews
• 31:38
  Speaker 1: with Jessica Taylor, the Cook Political Report, and Kirk Beto,
• 31:42
  Speaker 1: a Hotline editor-in-chief. But Hotline shared a fascinating, Kirk shared
• 31:46
  Speaker 1: a fascinating stat with me. And it goes back to
• 31:48
  Speaker 1: the Republican presidential primaries in 2016. Think about six of
• 31:52
  Speaker 1: the states where Republicans are now defending Senate seats or
• 31:55
  Speaker 1: facing surprisingly competitive races. Texas, Iowa, Kansas, Ohio, Maine, and Alaska. Okay.
• 32:06
  Speaker 1: Six of the, you know, the seventh that is on our,
• 32:08
  Speaker 1: you know, top tier list here is North Carolina. So
• 32:11
  Speaker 1: that's not on here. Of those six races I just mentioned, Texas, Iowa, Kansas, Ohio, Maine, Alaska.
• 32:16
  Speaker 1: Did you know that Donald Trump lost the Republican presidential
• 32:20
  Speaker 1: contest in every one of those states in 2016. Ted
• 32:24
  Speaker 1: Cruz won five of them and John Kasich won Ohio. Now,
• 32:30
  Speaker 1: what does that mean 10 years later? Is this just
• 32:31
  Speaker 1: an interesting anomaly or is there something here that perhaps
• 32:38
  Speaker 1: is sort of a leading indicator of where Trump's coalition
• 32:44
  Speaker 1: would fracture first, right? The most skeptical people of Trump
• 32:49
  Speaker 1: were in these states that Cruz and Kasich were still
• 32:52
  Speaker 1: able to win in 2016. And if you recall that
• 32:56
  Speaker 1: primary cycle, right, there was this big sort of, you'd
• 33:01
  Speaker 1: see this where Trump would, he sort of had a
• 33:04
  Speaker 1: hard ceiling. And in some of these places, the sort
• 33:07
  Speaker 1: of the, I call it the sort of traditional or
• 33:11
  Speaker 1: establishment wing of the party was a bit more resistant. Well,
• 33:16
  Speaker 1: Who's growing to become more and more anti-Trump all the time?
• 33:19
  Speaker 1: The old establishment wing of the Republican Party. So look,
• 33:25
  Speaker 1: the party's changed enormously and plenty of people who opposed
• 33:27
  Speaker 1: Trump in 16 have become loyal supporters. But I don't
• 33:32
  Speaker 1: think it's just a coincidence that so many of the
• 33:35
  Speaker 1: states that initially had larger Republican resistance to Trump than
• 33:39
  Speaker 1: other states are part of the conversation about Senate seats,
• 33:43
  Speaker 1: the first, some of the redder states that could end
• 33:46
  Speaker 1: up flipping. And why perhaps we should buy in that
• 33:51
  Speaker 1: this is actually, these are the states he's always had
• 33:54
  Speaker 1: a looser grip on. He's not had as strong of
• 33:57
  Speaker 1: a grip, right? Interesting. By the way, Bruce Bellman had
• 34:02
  Speaker 1: another historical nugget that I enjoyed. Do you know you
• 34:05
  Speaker 1: have to go all the way back to Ulysses S.
• 34:07
  Speaker 1: Grant to find a twice elected president, not consecutive terms, hint, hint,
• 34:13
  Speaker 1: a twice-elected president who completed his presidency with his own
• 34:16
  Speaker 1: party still controlling the United States Senate. Grant left office
• 34:20
  Speaker 1: in 1877, folks. Since then, Grover Cleveland, Woodrow Wilson, Dwight Eisenhower,
• 34:26
  Speaker 1: Ronald Reagan, Bill Clinton, and don't talk to me about
• 34:29
  Speaker 1: the 18 days he technically, Al Gore, was in control
• 34:32
  Speaker 1: of the Senate before, between January 3rd, 2001 to January 20th.
• 34:36
  Speaker 1: Set that aside. Bill Clinton lost his last midterm, Senate
• 34:40
  Speaker 1: control in the last midterm. George W. Bush, Barack Obama
• 34:43
  Speaker 1: all finished their presidencies with the opposition essentially controlling the Senate.
• 34:47
  Speaker 1: Seven presidents, seven opposition senates with that weird historical three-week
• 34:51
  Speaker 1: anomaly in 2001 with the 50-50 Senate that had Gore
• 34:56
  Speaker 1: tiebreaker for essentially three weeks and then, of course, chaining
• 35:02
  Speaker 1: the tiebreaker. But that's interesting. Now, history doesn't get to
• 35:06
  Speaker 1: cast a ballot in 2026, but it does tell you
• 35:08
  Speaker 1: something about how difficult it's been. any president to maintain
• 35:12
  Speaker 1: political support through the end of a second term. And
• 35:14
  Speaker 1: this second term feels pretty catastrophic compared to, you know,
• 35:19
  Speaker 1: you've got Nixon level bad second term. You know, Iran-Contra
• 35:24
  Speaker 1: doesn't seem nearly as much of a weight on Reagan
• 35:29
  Speaker 1: as what this is on him. You had, shoot, you know.
• 35:33
  Speaker 1: So this feels like it is a fitting continuation of
• 35:40
  Speaker 1: our history. So Trump's trying to do something that hasn't
• 35:42
  Speaker 1: happened in nearly 150 years. And that makes the way
• 35:46
  Speaker 1: he's conducting himself in these closing weeks all the more bizarre.
• 35:50
  Speaker 1: Because if you're trying to accomplish something that historically is difficult,
• 35:54
  Speaker 1: would you expect the president to be doing everything possible
• 35:57
  Speaker 1: to help his party? Instead, he feels like he's a
• 36:00
  Speaker 1: closet Democrat in the decisions that he's making. because instead
• 36:04
  Speaker 1: we're getting complaints about the Nobel Peace Prize and public
• 36:06
  Speaker 1: fights with Ukraine. But before we get there, I want
• 36:12
  Speaker 1: to spend a few minutes on Kansas, because Kansas is
• 36:14
  Speaker 1: the perfect illustration of how an incumbent can be caught
• 36:18
  Speaker 1: completely unprepared for a competitive election and a competitive political environment.
• 36:22
  Speaker 1: Roger Marshall is running for re-election now against Adam Hamilton,
• 36:26
  Speaker 1: the Democratic pastor who leads one of the largest United
• 36:29
  Speaker 1: Methodist congregations in the country. It's a state where Democrats
• 36:33
  Speaker 1: haven't elected a United States senator since 1932. Now, Marshall
• 36:37
  Speaker 1: finds himself in a competitive race, but he clearly never
• 36:40
  Speaker 1: thought he ever would end up here because the stories
• 36:43
  Speaker 1: that are coming out now shows a pretty arrogant dude, right?
• 36:47
  Speaker 1: There's a series of stories that raise serious questions about
• 36:50
  Speaker 1: how he's operated as a senator and as a candidate.
• 36:53
  Speaker 1: The Kansas Reflector, working with MSNOW, published an investigation into
• 36:57
  Speaker 1: Marshall's use of congressional staff and taxpayer-funded resources during his
• 37:02
  Speaker 1: 2020 campaign. The reporting includes text messages, calendars, recordings, accounts
• 37:07
  Speaker 1: from former staffers. Because one of the more interesting details
• 37:12
  Speaker 1: of this piece is that Marshall's campaign finance filings showed
• 37:15
  Speaker 1: no reported payroll expenses for campaign staff over a period
• 37:19
  Speaker 1: of years. His office says the campaign does not have
• 37:22
  Speaker 1: paid staff, and Marshall's representatives insist they complied with all
• 37:26
  Speaker 1: the rules. So how is this political operation functioning just
• 37:32
  Speaker 1: with volunteers? Is that what we're supposed to believe? Well,
• 37:35
  Speaker 1: the reporting goes further with allegations that official congressional resources
• 37:40
  Speaker 1: were used for campaign-related travel and activities. This is always
• 37:43
  Speaker 1: a tricky thing for sitting members of Congress, which he
• 37:46
  Speaker 1: was when he was seeking the Senate seat the first time.
• 37:48
  Speaker 1: They have. But this was pretty revealing and pretty damning.
• 37:52
  Speaker 1: In one text exchange that the reporters got a hold of,
• 37:55
  Speaker 1: Marshall's chief of staff was asked about the primary purpose
• 37:57
  Speaker 1: of a trip. whether it was official business or campaign business.
• 38:01
  Speaker 1: His response was, quote, primary purpose is what we say
• 38:04
  Speaker 1: it is. What an arrogant thing to say. There's a
• 38:09
  Speaker 1: whole bunch of people that have come into the politics
• 38:12
  Speaker 1: in the Trump era who really do believe the rules
• 38:15
  Speaker 1: don't apply to them. And these are the people that
• 38:19
  Speaker 1: have poisoned the Republican Party. These are the people who
• 38:23
  Speaker 1: I worry are being copycatted by the far left of
• 38:25
  Speaker 1: the Democratic Party. But this arrogance... that somehow, you know,
• 38:30
  Speaker 1: the rules don't apply to them. And that is a
• 38:33
  Speaker 1: pretty arrogant statement. There were also questions about Marshall's Florida home,
• 38:37
  Speaker 1: taxpayer-funded travel, lawsuits, and obviously there have been the lawsuits
• 38:41
  Speaker 1: involving former patients on unpaid medical bills. Now, look, Marshall
• 38:46
  Speaker 1: disputes that these are evidence of wrongdoing. Look, it doesn't
• 38:51
  Speaker 1: matter whether he can technically claim he followed the letter
• 38:56
  Speaker 1: of the law or not. This stuff is just proof
• 38:59
  Speaker 1: he was arrogant and thought the rules didn't apply to him.
• 39:03
  Speaker 1: And this is the type of stuff, right? Bad political
• 39:06
  Speaker 1: environments can expose bad candidates. This guy's never had to
• 39:09
  Speaker 1: run in a bad political environment. Now he's running in
• 39:11
  Speaker 1: a bad political environment. And he's finding out what life
• 39:17
  Speaker 1: is like. This is why I have very little confidence
• 39:19
  Speaker 1: this guy can win. Not in this place. When in 2014,
• 39:24
  Speaker 1: when Republicans sort of came in and took over the
• 39:26
  Speaker 1: Pat Roberts campaign Roberts had his own reservoir. of support.
• 39:30
  Speaker 1: He represented the state for quite a bit of time.
• 39:33
  Speaker 1: Roger Marshall doesn't have that reservoir of support. There were
• 39:36
  Speaker 1: some personal relationships that helped him out. Roger Marshall's not
• 39:41
  Speaker 1: a guy with a lot of personal relationships. It just
• 39:46
  Speaker 1: feels like you can sort of see the writing on
• 39:48
  Speaker 1: the wall on this one. But I'll tell you, you
• 39:52
  Speaker 1: know when a wave is getting bigger? When you have
• 39:54
  Speaker 1: members of the leadership of the party in power starting
• 39:57
  Speaker 1: to think they could lose too. Go down to North Carolina.
• 40:01
  Speaker 1: Richard Hudson, he's the chair of the House Republican campaign arm,
• 40:04
  Speaker 1: the NRCC. He's now had to reserve extra advertising time
• 40:08
  Speaker 1: in his own district. It's a district Trump won by
• 40:11
  Speaker 1: 15 points. We've talked about Kansas is a D plus
• 40:15
  Speaker 1: 16 Trump state. So if this is the environment we're
• 40:18
  Speaker 1: looking at, that's right. even a Hudson's in trouble. Now,
• 40:22
  Speaker 1: you know, that doesn't mean he's going to lose and
• 40:24
  Speaker 1: maybe it's precautionary, but boy, that's what recent history shows, right?
• 40:30
  Speaker 1: In truly large political waves, you sometimes see losses nobody anticipated.
• 40:35
  Speaker 1: The big one in 1994, right? Which, you know, that's increasingly,
• 40:39
  Speaker 1: is this 2006 for the Democrats or is this going
• 40:42
  Speaker 1: to be the Democrats own 94, which they have not
• 40:45
  Speaker 1: had anything that comes close to what Republicans pulled off
• 40:49
  Speaker 1: in 94. But in 94, Republicans knocked off the sitting
• 40:53
  Speaker 1: Speaker of the House, right? That was a genuinely historic result.
• 40:57
  Speaker 1: I don't know whether we're headed for anything like that
• 40:59
  Speaker 1: this year. But Richard Hudson's smart enough to know his history.
• 41:04
  Speaker 1: And it's like you better batten down your own hatches.
• 41:15
  Speaker 1: And that brings me back to a larger question. We
• 41:16
  Speaker 1: have a president who's approval rating according to Pew's at
• 41:18
  Speaker 1: 30 percent. An electorate where the most engaged voters are
• 41:22
  Speaker 1: expressing a substantially stronger preference for Democrats. And we have
• 41:26
  Speaker 1: Republican incumbents facing competitive races in states that haven't had
• 41:30
  Speaker 1: competition like this in decades. And what is the president
• 41:34
  Speaker 1: spending an extraordinary amount of time creating new controversies rather
• 41:38
  Speaker 1: than addressing the problems voters say concern them most? I
• 41:43
  Speaker 1: think Trump in his own head thinks these confrontations demonstrate
• 41:47
  Speaker 1: strength and own the libs and fire up his base.
• 41:50
  Speaker 1: but I don't think he understands the world that his
• 41:52
  Speaker 1: base is living in now. I know he believes picking
• 41:56
  Speaker 1: these fights is good politics. I just don't think it
• 41:58
  Speaker 1: works anymore. We've got an administration that's been doing over
• 42:03
  Speaker 1: the past few days, particularly this extraordinary proposal to live
• 42:07
  Speaker 1: stream an execution. I mean, let's start with Hegseth. I
• 42:10
  Speaker 1: have to tell you, of all the things this administration
• 42:12
  Speaker 1: has proposed, the idea that the United States government should
• 42:16
  Speaker 1: live stream an execution by firing squad, is perhaps the
• 42:20
  Speaker 1: most disturbing thing anybody out of the Trump orbit has
• 42:23
  Speaker 1: proposed and has been doing. We thought the aggressive ICE
• 42:28
  Speaker 1: tactics and the murdering of American citizens that has taken
• 42:30
  Speaker 1: place in Minnesota was bad, and it's bad. This is grotesque.
• 42:36
  Speaker 1: We're talking about Nidal Hassan. He's the former Army psychiatrist
• 42:40
  Speaker 1: convicted of murdering 13 people in Fort Hood in 2009.
• 42:44
  Speaker 1: He wounded dozens more. It was a horrific act of violence.
• 42:48
  Speaker 1: The victims and their family deserve real justice. And nobody
• 42:51
  Speaker 1: should mistake what I'm about to say as any sort
• 42:53
  Speaker 1: of sympathy for Hassan or any attempt to minimize what
• 42:56
  Speaker 1: he did. He's a rot in a hole for what
• 42:59
  Speaker 1: he did. But what exactly is the purpose of turning
• 43:03
  Speaker 1: his execution into a public spectacle? Hague says people need
• 43:08
  Speaker 1: to understand that there are serious consequences for committing these crimes.
• 43:13
  Speaker 1: What is wrong with you, Pete? Who broke you? I'm
• 43:16
  Speaker 1: sorry you have such broken personality disorder. I don't know
• 43:20
  Speaker 1: whether you have equipment issues that you don't like. I
• 43:24
  Speaker 1: don't know what it is, but man, you are a
• 43:26
  Speaker 1: broken dude. Does anybody in America not understand that the
• 43:29
  Speaker 1: death penalty means the government executes somebody? I think we
• 43:33
  Speaker 1: know how it works. Do we need to see it?
• 43:37
  Speaker 1: We have a real debate we ought to have about
• 43:39
  Speaker 1: capital punishment. What happened in Tennessee was terrible. And, you know,
• 43:49
  Speaker 1: it is easy to have an opinion about capital punishment
• 43:51
  Speaker 1: until you talk to a victim of somebody, you know,
• 43:55
  Speaker 1: the victim or a family member of a victim for
• 43:58
  Speaker 1: a grotesque, violent crime. And then you, you know, so
• 44:04
  Speaker 1: I think everybody has to put themselves in the shoes
• 44:07
  Speaker 1: of somebody else on some of these things. But I
• 44:11
  Speaker 1: think that we can see that the death penalty has
• 44:14
  Speaker 1: not served to do what it was supposed to do,
• 44:17
  Speaker 1: which was seek deterrence, right? And that hasn't worked. And
• 44:23
  Speaker 1: the system doesn't do that. And in the United States
• 44:25
  Speaker 1: of America, I think there is some pride in making
• 44:29
  Speaker 1: sure we don't execute somebody by accident. And if there's
• 44:32
  Speaker 1: a 1% chance, maybe we ought to not do it.
• 44:36
  Speaker 1: But we're not having a debate about the death penalty.
• 44:39
  Speaker 1: We're having a debate about whether to live stream a
• 44:43
  Speaker 1: firing squad. He wants to use the American military to
• 44:50
  Speaker 1: put this on your phones. What are we doing? This
• 44:53
  Speaker 1: is the United States military, an institution built around the
• 44:56
  Speaker 1: tradition of discipline, professionalism, and the idea that the use
• 45:02
  Speaker 1: of force carries enormous responsibility. This is not a video game.
• 45:07
  Speaker 1: This is not some reenactment of Greek mythology, you piece
• 45:11
  Speaker 1: of garbage. Pete Hicks said, you really are embarrassing so
• 45:17
  Speaker 1: many of us Americans. Not only should you not be
• 45:21
  Speaker 1: a defense secretary, but you should be dishonorably discharged. Your
• 45:32
  Speaker 1: military record should be stained with even proposing something like this.
• 45:39
  Speaker 1: I keep thinking about the dystopian movies from the 80s, right?
• 45:42
  Speaker 1: You remember The Running Man with Arnold Schwarzenegger, where society
• 45:45
  Speaker 1: becomes so degraded that state-sponsored violence is turned into mass entertainment?
• 45:51
  Speaker 1: Is this what Pete Hegseth grew up watching and idolizing? Man,
• 45:55
  Speaker 1: what a broken mind. He's kind of, look, the fact is,
• 45:58
  Speaker 1: as much as I get like, he really just, I
• 46:02
  Speaker 1: get worked up on this guy. I fully, there's, you know,
• 46:05
  Speaker 1: when you see somebody who's not just incompetent, but like
• 46:10
  Speaker 1: is defiantly incompetent and so broken and all these things.
• 46:16
  Speaker 1: I mean, he needs help. He clearly does. Because if
• 46:20
  Speaker 1: you're thinking this way, imagine thinking that there's an audience
• 46:25
  Speaker 1: for this. Who does he believe wants to watch the
• 46:28
  Speaker 1: government execute somebody? What's wrong with his mind that he
• 46:32
  Speaker 1: wants to show this and see this? Think about the
• 46:36
  Speaker 1: fact that he thinks that maybe this is somehow appealing
• 46:39
  Speaker 1: to the Republican base. Think about what that assumption says
• 46:43
  Speaker 1: about how this administration views its own supporters. I know
• 46:48
  Speaker 1: plenty of people who voted for Donald Trump because they
• 46:50
  Speaker 1: wanted to shake up Washington. They want to send a
• 46:53
  Speaker 1: message to people in mainstream media. They were frustrated with
• 46:56
  Speaker 1: the political establishment. They wanted some tougher immigration enforcement. Maybe
• 47:01
  Speaker 1: some of them thought the Republicans could handle the economy better.
• 47:04
  Speaker 1: I don't believe these people signed up to watch the
• 47:06
  Speaker 1: government execute prisoners and wanted the defense secretary to become
• 47:10
  Speaker 1: a snuff film producer. And I don't think we should
• 47:16
  Speaker 1: casually assume they did. There's a difference between wanting the
• 47:20
  Speaker 1: government to enforce the law and wanting the government to
• 47:22
  Speaker 1: celebrate its ability to kill somebody. That distinction, I think,
• 47:28
  Speaker 1: matters to real conservatives and people that support liberal, small
• 47:34
  Speaker 1: L democracy and pluralism. If you support showing this off,
• 47:40
  Speaker 1: you're not a smothy Democrat. You're not for democracy. You're
• 47:44
  Speaker 1: for some perverted form of authoritarianism. Glad to see J.D.
• 47:49
  Speaker 1: Vance is publicly uncomfortable with this. But this is not
• 47:54
  Speaker 1: a conversation. This is not a debate. Think about the
• 47:58
  Speaker 1: position it puts members of the military in. There's already
• 48:02
  Speaker 1: one religious freedom advocate saying he didn't want his children
• 48:05
  Speaker 1: or family watching him pull the trigger. He's asked not
• 48:07
  Speaker 1: to be included. Imagine the people that have to perform
• 48:11
  Speaker 1: the firing squad. Who signed up to the military to
• 48:22
  Speaker 1: do this? doesn't simply degrade the prisoner, regardless of his crimes.
• 48:26
  Speaker 1: It risks degrading the people. The government is asking to
• 48:30
  Speaker 1: carry out the sentence. And for what? What's the national
• 48:34
  Speaker 1: interest in showing this off? And I keep coming back. Apparently,
• 48:40
  Speaker 1: it's just an obsession or a fascination with just demonstrating power.
• 48:44
  Speaker 1: Look at the power we have. So what, you arrogant fuck?
• 48:50
  Speaker 1: Pardon my language, but I just, This is grotesque. Brings
• 48:56
  Speaker 1: me to Marco Rubio, the chameleon of the Republican Party,
• 49:01
  Speaker 1: who always is looking to rationalize his perversion of conservatism.
• 49:07
  Speaker 1: He gave a speech about Western civilization in the ancient Greeks. Now,
• 49:11
  Speaker 1: I want to be fair to Rubio because there's a
• 49:12
  Speaker 1: worthwhile conversation to be had about what defines Western civilization
• 49:16
  Speaker 1: and what we've inherited from the Greeks and Romans and
• 49:19
  Speaker 1: what makes every society strong. I don't think every attempt
• 49:24
  Speaker 1: to talk about courage, ambition, competition, and national pride should
• 49:28
  Speaker 1: automatically be dismissed. But Rubio's speech was fascinating for what
• 49:32
  Speaker 1: he chose to emphasize and what he chose to downgrade.
• 49:35
  Speaker 1: He talked about the Greek concept of thumos. This idea
• 49:38
  Speaker 1: of spiritedness, passion, courage, pride, the desire to compete and
• 49:42
  Speaker 1: distinguish yourself. And he argued that it was the spirit
• 49:45
  Speaker 1: of competition and striving that was central to the development
• 49:48
  Speaker 1: of Western civilization. There's certainly some truth to that. Greeks
• 49:52
  Speaker 1: valued competition. They competed in athletics, politics, philosophy, and war.
• 49:57
  Speaker 1: Their histories filled with rivalry, ambition, and pursuit of excellence.
• 50:01
  Speaker 1: But Rubio chose to ignore other parts of the Greeks.
• 50:05
  Speaker 1: We have a tendency to look backwards through history and
• 50:08
  Speaker 1: find the parts that validate whatever we already believe about
• 50:11
  Speaker 1: the present. If you believe military strength and the willingness
• 50:14
  Speaker 1: to fight are the defining characteristics of a successful civilization,
• 50:18
  Speaker 1: plenty of evidence in ancient Greece. But if you believe
• 50:22
  Speaker 1: the defining achievement of Western civilization was the development of reason, philosophy, inquiry,
• 50:27
  Speaker 1: and eventually institutions designed to constrain the arbitrary exercise of power, well,
• 50:33
  Speaker 1: you can find plenty of evidence of that too. The
• 50:36
  Speaker 1: Greeks gave us Sparta, but they also gave us Athens.
• 50:39
  Speaker 1: They gave us Socrates and Plato and Aristotle. And they
• 50:44
  Speaker 1: gave us the idea that we should question authority, examine
• 50:47
  Speaker 1: our assumptions and use reason rather than simply force to
• 50:50
  Speaker 1: settle disputes. It's a pretty important part of their inheritance.
• 50:54
  Speaker 1: They basically created politics. And you know, I say it
• 50:57
  Speaker 1: all the time. We created politics so that we didn't
• 51:00
  Speaker 1: have to resolve every dispute with violence. That is an
• 51:05
  Speaker 1: advancement in Western civilization, Secretary Rubio, not just showing off
• 51:10
  Speaker 1: your ability to run or jump. Now, Jonah Goldberg and
• 51:15
  Speaker 1: Andrew Sullivan, two conservative thinkers, I always am curious how
• 51:18
  Speaker 1: they react to something like this. They both had interesting
• 51:21
  Speaker 1: critiques of the Rubio speech. And I think you should
• 51:23
  Speaker 1: take a look at both of them. They're always tremendous
• 51:26
  Speaker 1: to read. I enjoy reading both of them. Witty, funny, smart,
• 51:30
  Speaker 1: all of the above. And they get at something pretty
• 51:32
  Speaker 1: important about this effort to elevate competition, willpower, and the
• 51:35
  Speaker 1: pursuit of glory into defining virtues of civilization. It's obviously
• 51:41
  Speaker 1: a selective reading of history. And when that happens, it
• 51:43
  Speaker 1: fit rather neatly with the worldview some of the people
• 51:46
  Speaker 1: running this administration have. And that's what connects Rubio's speech
• 51:50
  Speaker 1: to Hegseth's proposed execution spectacle. This fascination with the performance
• 51:55
  Speaker 1: of power. Strength has to be demonstrated. Dominance has to
• 51:59
  Speaker 1: be visible. The willingness to impose your will on somebody
• 52:04
  Speaker 1: becomes a virtue in and of itself. But there's another
• 52:07
  Speaker 1: tradition in Western civilization, folks, one that says power is
• 52:11
  Speaker 1: most legitimate when it's restrained by law, by institutions, and
• 52:15
  Speaker 1: by a recognition of human dignity. And you know what?
• 52:19
  Speaker 1: Last time I checked, I thought that was a pretty
• 52:20
  Speaker 1: conservative idea. The American founders were deeply suspicious of concentrated power.
• 52:26
  Speaker 1: They weren't simply trying to create a government strong enough
• 52:28
  Speaker 1: to oppose its will and use the firing squad to
• 52:31
  Speaker 1: show off its power. They wanted a government that could
• 52:34
  Speaker 1: exercise necessary authority without becoming arbitrary about it. That's why
• 52:40
  Speaker 1: we have checks and balances, an attempt at an independent
• 52:43
  Speaker 1: judiciary and protection for individual rights. And we didn't, those
• 52:48
  Speaker 1: restraints aren't signs of weakness. Donald Trump thinks the Miranda
• 52:51
  Speaker 1: rights are a sign of weakness. He doesn't understand our
• 52:58
  Speaker 1: republic at all. And it's ignorance with him. And we
• 53:01
  Speaker 1: know that. I wish it were, you know, there's always
• 53:03
  Speaker 1: been a frustration with Trump for so many of us. Right.
• 53:07
  Speaker 1: He's basically, you know, I've always said he's too lazy
• 53:10
  Speaker 1: to be Hitler because he just doesn't he just doesn't
• 53:13
  Speaker 1: want to do the work that would be necessary to
• 53:15
  Speaker 1: do something like this. But, you know, his critique of
• 53:20
  Speaker 1: of of American governance and his critique of American government
• 53:23
  Speaker 1: and his critique of the use of American power is
• 53:25
  Speaker 1: just It comes across as somebody who didn't even bother
• 53:28
  Speaker 1: to read the founding documents, didn't even bother to read
• 53:31
  Speaker 1: a Federalist paper, let alone all the Federalist papers. But look,
• 53:36
  Speaker 1: we're seeing this confusion between power and accomplishment and other
• 53:39
  Speaker 1: parts of administration. There was another story this week involving
• 53:42
  Speaker 1: Kimberly Guilfoyle and the grifters, the little grifters, right? Allegations
• 53:47
  Speaker 1: of success and influence, access, all that crap. And it
• 53:51
  Speaker 1: reminded me of the Wall Street Journal piece we discussed
• 53:53
  Speaker 1: last week about Scott Besant. and the way the Treasury
• 53:56
  Speaker 1: Department has been operating. Now, these are all supposedly different
• 53:59
  Speaker 1: stories involving different people, and the allegations are all, you know, sure,
• 54:04
  Speaker 1: judge them on their own merits, but they certainly offer
• 54:06
  Speaker 1: a window into the administration, right? And what they all
• 54:09
  Speaker 1: believe how this administration works. Cultivation of access, the importance
• 54:15
  Speaker 1: of personal relationships, the mixing of institutional responsibilities with politics,
• 54:21
  Speaker 1: Public service no longer should be distinguishable from personal or
• 54:25
  Speaker 1: political advantage, right? So the controversies may be different, but
• 54:30
  Speaker 1: they're not isolated. This is all the example being set
• 54:34
  Speaker 1: at the top, right? And that brings me to Lisa
• 54:38
  Speaker 1: Cook and the Federal Reserve. Trump's been trying to remove
• 54:40
  Speaker 1: Cook from the Federal Reserve Board because they They created,
• 54:45
  Speaker 1: they manufactured allegations about mortgage documents. He was just trying
• 54:49
  Speaker 1: to get more people, remember what his motivation was. And
• 54:52
  Speaker 1: then so they manufactured, they think they found something on
• 54:55
  Speaker 1: mortgage fraud, they didn't find it, but they're sticking to
• 54:57
  Speaker 1: their guns anyway. Now it's been denied, the Supreme Court's
• 55:01
  Speaker 1: weighed in, all these things. Well, the Supreme Court said
• 55:06
  Speaker 1: she was entitled to procedural protections before the president could
• 55:10
  Speaker 1: remove her. So now Trump has basically followed The order
• 55:15
  Speaker 1: of the Supreme Court created a committee of inquiry to
• 55:17
  Speaker 1: examine allegations and hold a hearing next month. You think
• 55:21
  Speaker 1: this is going to be a fair hearing or a
• 55:23
  Speaker 1: kangaroo court, right? We know this. This process is supposed
• 55:29
  Speaker 1: to design to be about determining facts independently. But we
• 55:35
  Speaker 1: kind of know if Trump's creating the committee what he
• 55:37
  Speaker 1: wants out of this, right? because the committee includes Kevin Hassett, right,
• 55:42
  Speaker 1: his personal economist. They're all Trump appointees. So it's not
• 55:47
  Speaker 1: really a genuine committee. It's just checking a box that
• 55:50
  Speaker 1: the Supreme Court said he had to check. And then
• 55:52
  Speaker 1: he's going to try to remove her again. We'll see
• 55:55
  Speaker 1: if they're able to pull it off. But it may
• 55:57
  Speaker 1: not matter because he's tanked the economy anyway, and there's
• 56:00
  Speaker 1: nothing he could do. Even Kevin Warsh isn't going to
• 56:03
  Speaker 1: follow his path of destruction of lower interest rates, even
• 56:08
  Speaker 1: when inflation is over 3%. So I think all those
• 56:16
  Speaker 1: stories belong together. And there's one other. The first involves
• 56:20
  Speaker 1: the Attorney General Todd Blanche. My old colleague, Allie Rogan,
• 56:26
  Speaker 1: we worked together at NBC. She's at PBS NewsHour, and
• 56:28
  Speaker 1: she obtained an internal Justice Department memo that now changes
• 56:32
  Speaker 1: the department's guidance concerning political activity by senior officials. Basically,
• 56:36
  Speaker 1: Todd Blanch is tired of being criticized and accused by
• 56:40
  Speaker 1: people like me that he has basically destroyed the reputation
• 56:42
  Speaker 1: of the Justice Department. He's overly politicizing it. He's violating
• 56:46
  Speaker 1: all these norms. So what does he do? He's changing
• 56:48
  Speaker 1: the interpretation of the laws themselves so it looks like
• 56:51
  Speaker 1: he's not violating any laws. I mean, it is a joke.
• 56:56
  Speaker 1: I mean, Blanche is trying to not look like he's
• 56:59
  Speaker 1: breaking a law or breaking a Justice Department advisory. So
• 57:02
  Speaker 1: he's going ahead and changing the interpretation of laws. Now,
• 57:06
  Speaker 1: the department says it's simply clarifying existing law. Please. He's
• 57:10
  Speaker 1: just lowering standards so that he can sit here and
• 57:13
  Speaker 1: politicize this thing. It is just awful what he's doing. And,
• 57:21
  Speaker 1: you know, it's funny. Like, Kennedy is literally, his stuff
• 57:24
  Speaker 1: is killing people. This is not a, you know, metaphorical charge, right?
• 57:31
  Speaker 1: His actions have led to deaths. have led to people
• 57:35
  Speaker 1: getting sicker. So there's no doubt to me, Kennedy is
• 57:38
  Speaker 1: the worst of all of them, right? Pete Exeth is
• 57:42
  Speaker 1: a close second for what he's doing because we're killing,
• 57:44
  Speaker 1: and Blanche and the entire, because we are illegally targeting
• 57:48
  Speaker 1: people in the Caribbean with no legal justification whatsoever. And
• 57:52
  Speaker 1: the Justice Department and the Pentagon are in cahoots on this.
• 57:55
  Speaker 1: You've had generals choose retirement over following this unconstitutional order.
• 58:01
  Speaker 1: So here we are. And that brings me back to
• 58:03
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump himself. There was another remarkable example of his
• 58:06
  Speaker 1: narcissism over the weekend, right? When the president once again
• 58:09
  Speaker 1: took to social media to complain about the Nobel Peace Prize.
• 58:12
  Speaker 1: He's just got it in his head, right? It all
• 58:14
  Speaker 1: goes back to his obsession with Obama. If Obama has something,
• 58:18
  Speaker 1: he wants it, right? Obama got a Nobel Peace Prize
• 58:21
  Speaker 1: and yeah, he certainly got awarded the Peace Prize before
• 58:24
  Speaker 1: he did anything. It was the strangest. There's no doubt
• 58:27
  Speaker 1: it deserves sort of a little bit of critique. And
• 58:30
  Speaker 1: even Obama in his acceptance of the Peace Prize, understood
• 58:35
  Speaker 1: it was for something they were hopeful for, not necessarily
• 58:38
  Speaker 1: something that had taken place. Hey, man, the Nobel Committee,
• 58:44
  Speaker 1: they can do whatever the heck they want. But Trump
• 58:46
  Speaker 1: really wants one badly. And it's in his own head
• 58:49
  Speaker 1: that he deserves one. And he thought he could do
• 58:52
  Speaker 1: what Teddy Roosevelt did, which is essentially bully the committee
• 58:54
  Speaker 1: into getting one. And he's never going to get one.
• 58:58
  Speaker 1: And in fact, it's funny, he claims he's ended all
• 59:02
  Speaker 1: these wars, except We're still involved with the war in Iran.
• 59:05
  Speaker 1: The Houthis have attacked civilian infrastructure in Saudi Arabia again
• 59:08
  Speaker 1: over the weekend. Russia continues its war against Ukraine. Trump's
• 59:11
  Speaker 1: helping the Russians in their war against Ukraine with this
• 59:14
  Speaker 1: ridiculous deal on diesel, which he could have done with
• 59:16
  Speaker 1: the Canadians. So Trump has advanced the cause of war
• 59:21
  Speaker 1: more in his second term than he's done anything. And
• 59:23
  Speaker 1: he claims to have ended wars that never were started
• 59:26
  Speaker 1: in the first place. But here we are. He's involved
• 59:32
  Speaker 1: in a war that has caused economic problems globally, is
• 59:37
  Speaker 1: causing him political problems domestically, and he wants a Nobel
• 59:41
  Speaker 1: Peace Prize for accomplishing what? What has he done? And
• 59:47
  Speaker 1: if instead he's now buying off, he's helping with Putin,
• 59:52
  Speaker 1: and here he goes again. Every time. He could have
• 59:55
  Speaker 1: done this deal with the Canadians, but he chose to
• 59:58
  Speaker 1: do it with the Russians who are helping the Iranians
• 1:00:01
  Speaker 1: in their war against our allies and against us. None
• 1:00:06
  Speaker 1: of this makes sense. And you know, where you end
• 1:00:08
  Speaker 1: up going back to, you're like, geez, why does Donald
• 1:00:11
  Speaker 1: Trump always do the unusual thing? And it always involves Putin.
• 1:00:15
  Speaker 1: I don't know. What could it fricking be? I mean,
• 1:00:20
  Speaker 1: you know, it's one of those though, you know, pick
• 1:00:25
  Speaker 1: your cliche, you know, Don't pee on my leg and
• 1:00:29
  Speaker 1: tell me it's raining. And man, does Trump pee on
• 1:00:35
  Speaker 1: our leg all the time when it comes to all
• 1:00:37
  Speaker 1: things Putin and Russia? And no, I didn't do that
• 1:00:43
  Speaker 1: to stumble onto some other part of the Russia conspiracy
• 1:00:46
  Speaker 1: that some of you may be smiling about right now.
• 1:00:50
  Speaker 1: I am just literally picking one of my favorite Southern metaphors.
• 1:00:57
  Speaker 1: But my God, every time he takes the side of
• 1:01:01
  Speaker 1: the Russians, every time. Now, maybe it's just because he
• 1:01:04
  Speaker 1: thinks Zelensky doesn't like him. But come on. I mean,
• 1:01:10
  Speaker 1: you're literally doing a deal that runs counter to a
• 1:01:13
  Speaker 1: bill you signed a week or so ago. I mean, like,
• 1:01:17
  Speaker 1: good luck, Darlene Graham. Your signature achievement is getting your
• 1:01:21
  Speaker 1: late brother's sanctions bill against Russia passed. And your patron
• 1:01:26
  Speaker 1: politically just completely sold your brother's legacy down the river,
• 1:01:31
  Speaker 1: Darlene Graham. But you will never, you know, you have
• 1:01:34
  Speaker 1: no choice but to salute and say, yes, sir, may
• 1:01:36
  Speaker 1: I have another? Because your political career wouldn't exist without
• 1:01:40
  Speaker 1: Donald Trump. But here we go. I know we're not
• 1:01:47
  Speaker 1: supposed to, oh, Jesus, that investigation is over. Well, an
• 1:01:53
  Speaker 1: investigation never happened, just so you know, because it was
• 1:01:58
  Speaker 1: nothing but obstruction during the investigative portion of this. But regardless,
• 1:02:04
  Speaker 1: whether he is an asset of the Russians, he's behaving
• 1:02:08
  Speaker 1: like an asset of the Russians. That in itself should
• 1:02:11
  Speaker 1: be enough to frustrate a man. But Here we are. Now,
• 1:02:23
  Speaker 1: you know, I give the Ukrainians credit. They're always looking
• 1:02:26
  Speaker 1: for a way to try to they they're just so
• 1:02:29
  Speaker 1: afraid of losing American support that Trump will just willy
• 1:02:33
  Speaker 1: nilly pull it. And, you know, we don't he doesn't
• 1:02:36
  Speaker 1: get much American support, but he gets just enough. Because
• 1:02:40
  Speaker 1: there are certain things Trump won't do, but I'll tell you.
• 1:02:44
  Speaker 1: There's already some Republican members of Congress trying to nullify
• 1:02:47
  Speaker 1: this deal with congressional action. This lame duck, if Republicans
• 1:02:53
  Speaker 1: lose badly in this election, and it's a bigger wave
• 1:02:57
  Speaker 1: than we're all anticipating, the impeachment for Pete Hegseth, I think,
• 1:03:03
  Speaker 1: goes up. The odds of that goes up substantially. And
• 1:03:08
  Speaker 1: the second is this deal with Russia gets nullified. and
• 1:03:14
  Speaker 1: it may get veto-proof type of support. But forget any
• 1:03:22
  Speaker 1: of this. This is what Trump's concentrating on. He thinks
• 1:03:25
  Speaker 1: this is going to lower diesel. It's not going to
• 1:03:27
  Speaker 1: do anything for the price of diesel before election day.
• 1:03:30
  Speaker 1: But he did signal to our allies that we're going
• 1:03:32
  Speaker 1: to sell Ukraine down the river. And we're once again
• 1:03:35
  Speaker 1: going to support the Russians who are supporting the Iranians
• 1:03:38
  Speaker 1: in a war that we're supposedly involved with the Iranians.
• 1:03:43
  Speaker 1: But none of this helps his party. Whether he's trying
• 1:03:47
  Speaker 1: to pick a fight with the press, whether he's all
• 1:03:49
  Speaker 1: these things that he's doing. He's, well, as I said
• 1:03:54
  Speaker 1: last week, bad gets worse. And it's only getting worse.
• 1:04:05
  Speaker 1: It's the time. All right, it is time to jump
• 1:04:13
  Speaker 1: into the time machine. And this week, we're going back
• 1:04:16
  Speaker 1: to October 14th, 1912, to Milwaukee, Wisconsin. One of the
• 1:04:21
  Speaker 1: most extraordinary moments in the history of American presidential campaigns.
• 1:04:26
  Speaker 1: Theodore Roosevelt is leaving his hotel. He's on his way
• 1:04:29
  Speaker 1: to give a campaign speech when a man steps out
• 1:04:33
  Speaker 1: of the crowd and shoots him in the chest. The
• 1:04:35
  Speaker 1: bullet passes through Roosevelt's overcoat, his steel eyeglass case, and
• 1:04:39
  Speaker 1: the thick manuscript of the speech he's carrying in his
• 1:04:43
  Speaker 1: breast pocket before lodging in his chest. So basically, he
• 1:04:49
  Speaker 1: had some protection before the bullet got to his chest. Now,
• 1:04:54
  Speaker 1: most people, having just been shot, would probably have canceled
• 1:04:58
  Speaker 1: the speech. Not Teddy Roosevelt. Roosevelt realizes he's not coughing
• 1:05:03
  Speaker 1: up blood. Concludes the bullet probably hasn't penetrated his lung
• 1:05:09
  Speaker 1: and insists he can go to the auditorium. He gets
• 1:05:14
  Speaker 1: on stage, tells the audience he's been shot and proceeds
• 1:05:18
  Speaker 1: to speak for another 80 minutes, 8-0. And at one
• 1:05:23
  Speaker 1: point he pulls out the bloodstained manuscript, shows it to
• 1:05:27
  Speaker 1: the crowd. And he delivers one of the great lines
• 1:05:31
  Speaker 1: in American political history, takes more than that to kill
• 1:05:34
  Speaker 1: a bull moose. The man who shot him was John Schrenk,
• 1:05:39
  Speaker 1: a former saloon keeper who later claimed that William McKinley's
• 1:05:43
  Speaker 1: ghost had appeared to him in a dream and accused
• 1:05:47
  Speaker 1: Roosevelt of being responsible for McKinley's death. Kind of like,
• 1:05:51
  Speaker 1: this guy sounds like crazy Roger Stone who's, you know,
• 1:05:55
  Speaker 1: who continues to push the conspiracy theory that LBJ had
• 1:05:59
  Speaker 1: Kennedy killed. Roger Stone gets taken seriously by some people
• 1:06:04
  Speaker 1: and countries actually buy him, make him their lobbyist. He's
• 1:06:08
  Speaker 1: cuckoo birds, folks. People who think this stuff, cuckoo birds.
• 1:06:11
  Speaker 1: And here's another reminder that history has its share of
• 1:06:16
  Speaker 1: cuckoo birds. Now, Roosevelt had become president because McKinley was
• 1:06:19
  Speaker 1: assassinated in 1901. Schrenk also believed Roosevelt was violating an
• 1:06:24
  Speaker 1: important American tradition by seeking a third term. So it's
• 1:06:30
  Speaker 1: a bizarre connection between two presidential assassination stories. But this
• 1:06:35
  Speaker 1: is all an extraordinary story on its own, and it
• 1:06:38
  Speaker 1: tells you quite a bit about Teddy Roosevelt. His ego,
• 1:06:41
  Speaker 1: his appetite for attention, his extraordinary physical courage, and his
• 1:06:45
  Speaker 1: almost limitless belief in his own indispensability. He alone can
• 1:06:50
  Speaker 1: fix it. But I think the more interesting question is
• 1:06:53
  Speaker 1: why Roosevelt was standing on that stage in Milwaukee in
• 1:06:55
  Speaker 1: the first place. Before Teddy Roosevelt was a former Republican
• 1:06:59
  Speaker 1: president running against a sitting Republican president, it wasn't just
• 1:07:04
  Speaker 1: any Republican president. He was running against, he chose to
• 1:07:08
  Speaker 1: run against the man he personally selected to succeed him,
• 1:07:11
  Speaker 1: William Howard Taft. And the Republican Civil War of 1912,
• 1:07:15
  Speaker 1: which culminates in Roosevelt leaving the party and running as
• 1:07:18
  Speaker 1: a third party candidate, tells us quite a bit about
• 1:07:20
  Speaker 1: political argument, a political argument that has never entirely disappeared
• 1:07:28
  Speaker 1: from inside the Republican Party. And it's also a reminder
• 1:07:31
  Speaker 1: that a political leader can win an enormous personal following
• 1:07:35
  Speaker 1: without necessarily winning the argument over what his party should become.
• 1:07:39
  Speaker 1: So let's go back a few years. Roosevelt becomes president
• 1:07:42
  Speaker 1: at just 42, youngest president in American history, and he
• 1:07:46
  Speaker 1: brings a very different concept of presidential leadership. He believes
• 1:07:49
  Speaker 1: the federal government ought to be much more active in
• 1:07:52
  Speaker 1: dealing with the enormous economic and social changes that were
• 1:07:55
  Speaker 1: transforming the country at the time, industrial revolution. This is
• 1:07:59
  Speaker 1: the height of industrial capitalism, the railroad, steel, you name it.
• 1:08:03
  Speaker 1: The country is urbanizing and industrializing quickly, and Roosevelt believes
• 1:08:06
  Speaker 1: the national government has to become stronger in order to
• 1:08:10
  Speaker 1: deal with this new concentration of private wealth. He calls
• 1:08:14
  Speaker 1: his approach the square deal. He goes after corporate monopolies,
• 1:08:18
  Speaker 1: pushes consumer protections, expands conservation, believes the presidency ought to
• 1:08:23
  Speaker 1: be used aggressively to advance the public interest, the bully pulpit. Essentially,
• 1:08:28
  Speaker 1: the concept is invented by him. Now, he's not some
• 1:08:31
  Speaker 1: modern liberal, although you may think so by today's standards,
• 1:08:36
  Speaker 1: but he wasn't some modern liberal dropped into the early
• 1:08:38
  Speaker 1: 20th century. He was a nationalist, he was an imperialist,
• 1:08:43
  Speaker 1: and he was a believer in American military power. His
• 1:08:45
  Speaker 1: views on race were very much shaped by the prejudice
• 1:08:48
  Speaker 1: of the era, and he had a complicated relationship with
• 1:08:52
  Speaker 1: organized labor. But within the Republican Party, he's part of
• 1:08:55
  Speaker 1: a progressive tradition that believes government has an important role
• 1:08:58
  Speaker 1: in checking the excess of capitalism. And by 1908, Roosevelt
• 1:09:03
  Speaker 1: had become very popular. He could have won a third
• 1:09:07
  Speaker 1: term had he run, but he promised not to seek
• 1:09:10
  Speaker 1: another term after winning reelection in 1904. So he decided
• 1:09:13
  Speaker 1: to honor the promise and he chooses a successor, William
• 1:09:16
  Speaker 1: Howard Taft. Taft had been the governor general of the Philippines,
• 1:09:20
  Speaker 1: And he was also Roosevelt's Secretary of War. A close friend,
• 1:09:25
  Speaker 1: very trusted. And he thought Taft would continue the progressive vision.
• 1:09:32
  Speaker 1: Roosevelt even campaigned for him in 1908. Taft wins the presidency.
• 1:09:36
  Speaker 1: Roosevelt heads to Africa. And that's when things went haywire
• 1:09:41
  Speaker 1: because Taft is not Teddy. Taft is a lawyer by temperament.
• 1:09:45
  Speaker 1: He's cautious, methodical, and much more concerned about the legal process.
• 1:09:50
  Speaker 1: Perhaps that's why he ended up a Supreme Court justice, right?
• 1:09:55
  Speaker 1: He understood there were limits to his power. Teddy always
• 1:09:58
  Speaker 1: was trying to test those limits. So Taft didn't see
• 1:10:01
  Speaker 1: himself as a caretaker of the Roosevelt presidency. He actually
• 1:10:04
  Speaker 1: saw himself as president. Why wouldn't he? Now, here's where
• 1:10:09
  Speaker 1: the conventional version of this story gets a little misleading.
• 1:10:13
  Speaker 1: Taft wasn't simply a tool of big business who abandoned
• 1:10:15
  Speaker 1: everything Roosevelt believed in. In fact, his administration brought more
• 1:10:19
  Speaker 1: antitrust lawsuits than Roosevelt had. In fact, one of those
• 1:10:24
  Speaker 1: lawsuits helped destroy their friendship. In October 1911, Taft's Justice
• 1:10:29
  Speaker 1: Department sued U.S. Steel, challenging, among other things, its acquisition
• 1:10:33
  Speaker 1: of a Tennessee coal and iron company during the financial
• 1:10:37
  Speaker 1: panic in 1907. It was a deal Roosevelt himself had
• 1:10:41
  Speaker 1: approved while he was president. So Roosevelt took the lawsuit personally.
• 1:10:45
  Speaker 1: He believed the Taft administration was essentially of accusing him
• 1:10:48
  Speaker 1: of having been duped by the very corporations he'd spent
• 1:10:51
  Speaker 1: his presidency trying to regulate. So here's the strange thing
• 1:10:56
  Speaker 1: about their falling out. Taft wasn't necessarily getting Roosevelt angry
• 1:10:59
  Speaker 1: by refusing to go after big business. In this case,
• 1:11:03
  Speaker 1: he was getting Teddy angry by going after big business
• 1:11:05
  Speaker 1: in a way that challenged Teddy's own judgment. Now, there
• 1:11:10
  Speaker 1: were some other flashpoints. Taft signed the Payne-Uldrich Tariff Act
• 1:11:14
  Speaker 1: in 1909, which progressive Republicans believed failed to deliver the
• 1:11:18
  Speaker 1: tariff reductions that had been promised. Then came the Ballinger-Pinchot controversy.
• 1:11:24
  Speaker 1: It was a bitter fight over conservation policy that ended
• 1:11:29
  Speaker 1: with Taft firing Gifford Pinchot, Roosevelt's close friend and head
• 1:11:34
  Speaker 1: of the Forest Service. Roosevelt saw that as evidence that
• 1:11:37
  Speaker 1: Taft was abandoning conservation. inciting with big corporate interests. Taft
• 1:11:42
  Speaker 1: saw Roosevelt's allies as refusing to accept the authority of
• 1:11:45
  Speaker 1: a new president. And the more Taft asserted his independence,
• 1:11:51
  Speaker 1: the more Roosevelt took it personally. By 1910, Roosevelt is
• 1:11:55
  Speaker 1: back in American politics and he's becoming more outspoken, what
• 1:11:59
  Speaker 1: he calls a new nationalism, much more expansive vision of
• 1:12:02
  Speaker 1: federal power than the one Taft is comfortable with. Roosevelt
• 1:12:06
  Speaker 1: wants stronger regulation of corporations, more protection for workers, progressive taxation.
• 1:12:11
  Speaker 1: We didn't have that amendment just yet to impose an
• 1:12:16
  Speaker 1: income tax. That's coming later that decade. And a government
• 1:12:19
  Speaker 1: willing to intervene more aggressively in the economy. Taft worries
• 1:12:22
  Speaker 1: that Roosevelt is treating constitutional limits as obstacles to be
• 1:12:26
  Speaker 1: overcome rather than principles to be respected. So by 1912,
• 1:12:32
  Speaker 1: Roosevelt decides he wants the presidency back. Now, there's another
• 1:12:37
  Speaker 1: character worth remembering here, because Roosevelt didn't actually start the
• 1:12:41
  Speaker 1: progressive challenge to Taft. It was Robert La Follette of Wisconsin.
• 1:12:47
  Speaker 1: He was already running against the president, arguing that the
• 1:12:49
  Speaker 1: Republican Party needed to return to the Teddy Roosevelt progressive principles. Well,
• 1:12:55
  Speaker 1: then Roosevelt enters the race in February, and suddenly much
• 1:12:57
  Speaker 1: of the attention, money, and energy starts moving to him.
• 1:13:02
  Speaker 1: La Follette stays in, and he actually wins primaries in Wisconsin,
• 1:13:05
  Speaker 1: his home state, and North Dakota. But Teddy is a
• 1:13:08
  Speaker 1: dominant challenger, and he becomes more aggressive about the courts.
• 1:13:12
  Speaker 1: In a February speech in Columbus, Ohio, Roosevelt proposes allowing
• 1:13:15
  Speaker 1: voters to overturn certain state court decisions involving state constitutional questions.
• 1:13:23
  Speaker 1: That's some more direct democracy, folks. Doesn't apply to the U.S.
• 1:13:27
  Speaker 1: Supreme Court, but it's controversial enough that it alarms Taft.
• 1:13:31
  Speaker 1: Ohio's his home state. Remember that. Taft, that is. And
• 1:13:34
  Speaker 1: many establishment progressives who believe Roosevelt is threatening judicial independence. Now,
• 1:13:40
  Speaker 1: presidential nominations worked a lot differently in 1912. There were
• 1:13:43
  Speaker 1: some primaries, but most delegates were still selected through party
• 1:13:47
  Speaker 1: organizations and conventions. The primaries were just sort of guidance
• 1:13:51
  Speaker 1: from the voters. But Roosevelt was the man of the people,
• 1:13:55
  Speaker 1: and he was winning the primaries. He wins nine of
• 1:13:57
  Speaker 1: 12 contests, including Ohio, Taft's home state. Taft only won Massachusetts,
• 1:14:03
  Speaker 1: and he did so narrowly. I told you about La
• 1:14:05
  Speaker 1: Follette winning the other two. So Roosevelt believes he's demonstrated
• 1:14:09
  Speaker 1: that the voters want him back. But Taft controlled the machine.
• 1:14:14
  Speaker 1: And when the convention meets in Chicago, the fight over
• 1:14:17
  Speaker 1: contested delegates becomes explosive. The RNC awards overwhelming majorities of
• 1:14:22
  Speaker 1: the delegates to Taft. And you know what happens. The
• 1:14:28
  Speaker 1: man chosen to chair the convention, by the way, is
• 1:14:30
  Speaker 1: Eli O'Root. Roosevelt's own former secretary of state, and roots
• 1:14:34
  Speaker 1: sides with the Taft organization during all these disputes. So
• 1:14:38
  Speaker 1: Roosevelt is trying to reclaim the Republican Party, and one
• 1:14:40
  Speaker 1: of the men helping stop him is somebody who served
• 1:14:42
  Speaker 1: in Teddy's own cabinet. But Roosevelt's supporters accused the party
• 1:14:46
  Speaker 1: establishment of stealing the nomination. It all sounds familiar, doesn't it?
• 1:14:51
  Speaker 1: But Taft wins. Roosevelt has a decision to make. He
• 1:14:54
  Speaker 1: can accept the outcome and try to influence the party
• 1:14:56
  Speaker 1: from within, or he can leave and run against the
• 1:14:59
  Speaker 1: man he helped elect four years earlier. He chooses to leave.
• 1:15:03
  Speaker 1: And the Bull Moose Party is born. The nickname comes
• 1:15:06
  Speaker 1: from Roosevelt's declaration that he feels as strong as a
• 1:15:08
  Speaker 1: bull moose. And this is where I want to make
• 1:15:11
  Speaker 1: an important distinction about Roosevelt and the modern Republican Party.
• 1:15:14
  Speaker 1: Because it's tempting to compare Teddy and Trump. Some of
• 1:15:19
  Speaker 1: the comparisons are fair. Roosevelt had an enormous ego. He
• 1:15:23
  Speaker 1: loved attention. He loved political combat. But Teddy Roosevelt also
• 1:15:29
  Speaker 1: read I don't know if Trump reads. And he believed
• 1:15:32
  Speaker 1: he had a special relationship with the American people. And
• 1:15:36
  Speaker 1: he had a remarkable ability to make every political argument
• 1:15:39
  Speaker 1: revolve around himself. But he also believed that the party
• 1:15:42
  Speaker 1: establishment was standing between him and the voters who wanted him. Ideologically, though,
• 1:15:48
  Speaker 1: these guys were very different men. Roosevelt believed in a
• 1:15:51
  Speaker 1: much more activist federal government for the people. Trump believes
• 1:15:55
  Speaker 1: in an activist federal government for personal gain. Teddy wanted
• 1:15:59
  Speaker 1: Washington to regulate corporate power, improve working conditions, and take
• 1:16:03
  Speaker 1: greater responsibility for economic security of ordinary Americans. Trump wants
• 1:16:08
  Speaker 1: to do all those things to feather his own nest.
• 1:16:12
  Speaker 1: Teddy's progressive party platform included social insurance, labor protections, women's suffrage,
• 1:16:17
  Speaker 1: stronger regulation of business. Internationally, Roosevelt argued that America ought
• 1:16:22
  Speaker 1: to be deeply engaged in the world. He was no isolationist.
• 1:16:25
  Speaker 1: He was an unapologetic advocate for American power abroad. So
• 1:16:28
  Speaker 1: I guess you could say he had a little, that's
• 1:16:30
  Speaker 1: where Teddy and Trump have something in common. Although his
• 1:16:34
  Speaker 1: version of internationalism included plenty of imperialism, right? And Trump
• 1:16:38
  Speaker 1: uses Teddy sometimes to rationalize or at least try to
• 1:16:42
  Speaker 1: make his desires seem less egregious. There's another distinction. Roosevelt
• 1:16:48
  Speaker 1: had a coherent vision of what he wanted the American
• 1:16:50
  Speaker 1: government to become, something he believed was actually larger than
• 1:16:54
  Speaker 1: his own presidency. Now, he wanted to be the man
• 1:16:57
  Speaker 1: to build it. No one ever accused Teddy Roosevelt of
• 1:17:01
  Speaker 1: excessive modesty. Please put my face on Mount Rushmore, right?
• 1:17:05
  Speaker 1: And you can reasonably question how much his personal ambition
• 1:17:08
  Speaker 1: was driving his decisions in 1912. But there was a
• 1:17:12
  Speaker 1: substantial governing philosophy underneath his enormous ego. My view of
• 1:17:17
  Speaker 1: Trump is much different. His political movement is much more
• 1:17:19
  Speaker 1: closely tied to his own personal power, grievances, demands for loyalty,
• 1:17:24
  Speaker 1: financial gain, pure and simple. The personalities can invite comparisons,
• 1:17:28
  Speaker 1: but the political philosophies are quite different. And that difference
• 1:17:32
  Speaker 1: matters when you look at what Roosevelt was actually proposing
• 1:17:34
  Speaker 1: in 1912. His progressive party was calling for reforms that
• 1:17:38
  Speaker 1: would eventually become central to 20th century American liberalism. Some
• 1:17:44
  Speaker 1: of those ideas would later find a home in the
• 1:17:46
  Speaker 1: New Deal, which raises a fascinating question about what Roosevelt
• 1:17:51
  Speaker 1: was actually accomplishing by leaving the Republican Party. Was he
• 1:17:54
  Speaker 1: remaking the Republican Party? Or was he helping make progressive
• 1:17:58
  Speaker 1: Republicanism something that would be adopted by the Democratic Party? Now,
• 1:18:06
  Speaker 1: there's another way to look at Roosevelt's decision, a more
• 1:18:08
  Speaker 1: cynical one. Maybe Teddy would rather see the Republican Party
• 1:18:11
  Speaker 1: lose the presidency than watch somebody else lead it in
• 1:18:14
  Speaker 1: a direction he didn't like. That's something Trump might have
• 1:18:17
  Speaker 1: in common with Teddy. We'll see what 28 looks like. Now,
• 1:18:21
  Speaker 1: Teddy's supporters would argue the country needed reform and that
• 1:18:23
  Speaker 1: Taft's Republican Party was standing in the way. His critics
• 1:18:27
  Speaker 1: would argue that Roosevelt couldn't tolerate somebody else controlling the
• 1:18:30
  Speaker 1: party he believed belonged to him. And there's truth in
• 1:18:33
  Speaker 1: both interpretations. And that brings us back to Milwaukee. Roosevelt's
• 1:18:39
  Speaker 1: been shot and he insists on giving a speech anyway.
• 1:18:42
  Speaker 1: It tells you something about that's both a bit admirable
• 1:18:46
  Speaker 1: and the less admirable parts of Teddy. He genuinely believed
• 1:18:49
  Speaker 1: that stakes for the country were enormous. He also genuinely
• 1:18:53
  Speaker 1: believed he was indispensable to the outcome. Three weeks later,
• 1:18:59
  Speaker 1: Americans voted. Woodrow Wilson wins with 42% of the popular vote.
• 1:19:03
  Speaker 1: Roosevelt gets 27%, and the sitting Republican president, Taft, finishes
• 1:19:08
  Speaker 1: third with 23%. The Electoral College is a blowout, though.
• 1:19:12
  Speaker 1: 435 electoral votes for Wilson, 88 for Teddy. And Taft,
• 1:19:17
  Speaker 1: the sitting president, gets eight. He only carried Utah and Vermont.
• 1:19:23
  Speaker 1: There was another candidate in that race. Socialist Eugene Debs
• 1:19:27
  Speaker 1: got about 6% of the popular vote. So if you
• 1:19:30
  Speaker 1: add together Wilson, Roosevelt, and Debs, roughly three-quarters of Americans
• 1:19:33
  Speaker 1: voted for candidates promising some form of political or economic reform.
• 1:19:38
  Speaker 1: even if they had very different ideas about what the
• 1:19:40
  Speaker 1: reform should look like. That was actually a remarkable result. Now,
• 1:19:45
  Speaker 1: the Progressive Party tried to survive as a national political
• 1:19:47
  Speaker 1: organization after 1912, but it never became a durable replacement
• 1:19:51
  Speaker 1: for the Republicans. In fact, by 1916, Roosevelt is back
• 1:19:55
  Speaker 1: supporting a Republican presidential nominee, Charles Evans Hughes. The Bull
• 1:19:58
  Speaker 1: Moose Movement had demonstrated enormous energy, but it couldn't permanently
• 1:20:02
  Speaker 1: reorganize American Party politics around Petty. And there's a human
• 1:20:07
  Speaker 1: ending to the Teddy Taft feud that's worth mentioning. In
• 1:20:11
  Speaker 1: May of 1918, the two men encountered each other in
• 1:20:14
  Speaker 1: a Chicago hotel dining room and had a brief emotional reconciliation.
• 1:20:17
  Speaker 1: After years of a bitter public feud, they were finally
• 1:20:22
  Speaker 1: able to put some of it behind them. Roosevelt would
• 1:20:24
  Speaker 1: die eight months later. He never did live to see
• 1:20:27
  Speaker 1: what would happen next, because when Republicans finally returned to
• 1:20:30
  Speaker 1: the White House in 1921, whose Republican party was ascendant,
• 1:20:35
  Speaker 1: Teddy's or Taft's? Well, Warren Harding runs on a return
• 1:20:39
  Speaker 1: to normalcy. Calvin Coolidge eventually succeeds him. Andrew Mellon becomes
• 1:20:43
  Speaker 1: the dominant figure in economic policy. That's a party much
• 1:20:47
  Speaker 1: more comfortable with big business, lower taxes, and a restrained
• 1:20:50
  Speaker 1: federal role for the economy. That wasn't what Teddy Roosevelt
• 1:20:54
  Speaker 1: envisioned in 1912. And of course, Harding then appoints Taft
• 1:20:58
  Speaker 1: as Chief Justice of the United States. How about that?
• 1:21:03
  Speaker 1: The Republican establishment Teddy tried to overthrow not only wins,
• 1:21:08
  Speaker 1: its leader ends up on the Supreme Court. Now, if
• 1:21:10
  Speaker 1: you stop the story there, you'd conclude that Teddy lost
• 1:21:13
  Speaker 1: the argument over the future of the Republicanism. And certainly
• 1:21:17
  Speaker 1: he did over the Republican Party. But there's another part
• 1:21:20
  Speaker 1: of this story, isn't there? Because while the Republican Party
• 1:21:23
  Speaker 1: was moving away from Roosevelt's progressive philosophy, the Democratic Party
• 1:21:27
  Speaker 1: decided to embrace it. It started with Woodrow Wilson. He
• 1:21:33
  Speaker 1: was running in 1912 on something he called the new freedom,
• 1:21:35
  Speaker 1: which was just a different phrase for Roosevelt's new nationalism.
• 1:21:40
  Speaker 1: Roosevelt believed big corporations were a permanent part of the
• 1:21:43
  Speaker 1: American economy and the federal government needed enough power to
• 1:21:45
  Speaker 1: regulate them. Wilson argued that governments should do more to
• 1:21:48
  Speaker 1: break up concentrations of economic power and restore competition. So
• 1:21:53
  Speaker 1: they wasn't identical visions, but they were close. In 1913,
• 1:21:57
  Speaker 1: Wilson signs the Federal Reserve Act, changing the banking system.
• 1:22:01
  Speaker 1: These are all things. The Clayton Antitrust Act in 1914.
• 1:22:06
  Speaker 1: All very Roosevelt-like ideas, using the national government to regulate
• 1:22:10
  Speaker 1: corporate behavior. 1916, Roosevelt signs legislation establishing the eight-hour workday.
• 1:22:18
  Speaker 1: So here we are. Now Wilson's running for re-election in 1916,
• 1:22:21
  Speaker 1: and the timing of the burst of progressive legislation is
• 1:22:24
  Speaker 1: no accident. He knows the Bull Moose Party has largely collapsed,
• 1:22:28
  Speaker 1: but its voters didn't disappear, and he wanted them in
• 1:22:31
  Speaker 1: his coalition. So Wilson started to try to convince progressive
• 1:22:35
  Speaker 1: Republicans who supported Roosevelt in 12 that they had a
• 1:22:37
  Speaker 1: home in the Democratic Party. And it helps. He narrowly
• 1:22:40
  Speaker 1: wins re-election in 16. And Wilson states that that had
• 1:22:44
  Speaker 1: shown substantial progressive strength in the western part of the
• 1:22:47
  Speaker 1: country four years earlier, play an important role in the
• 1:22:51
  Speaker 1: Electoral College. So Roosevelt does create a coalition that exists
• 1:22:58
  Speaker 1: in 1916 and starts voting for the Democrats. 20 years later,
• 1:23:02
  Speaker 1: FDR comes to Washington in the middle of the Great Depression,
• 1:23:05
  Speaker 1: and much more expansive vision of federal responsibility becomes the
• 1:23:09
  Speaker 1: foundation of the New Deal. And there's a whole bunch
• 1:23:13
  Speaker 1: of things Teddy Roosevelt was advocating for in 1912 that's
• 1:23:16
  Speaker 1: a part of it. Now, the New Deal wasn't simply
• 1:23:19
  Speaker 1: Teddy Roosevelt's 1912 platform dusted off, but there is a
• 1:23:24
  Speaker 1: recognizable connection between the new nationalism and the modern federal
• 1:23:27
  Speaker 1: government that emerged in the 1930s. And much of that
• 1:23:30
  Speaker 1: reform tradition found a lasting political home in the Democratic Party.
• 1:23:35
  Speaker 1: And it raises a question I've been thinking about as
• 1:23:37
  Speaker 1: I was revisiting this 1912 campaign. Where would the Bull
• 1:23:43
  Speaker 1: Moose Republicans fit in our politics today? Because if you
• 1:23:46
  Speaker 1: squint a little, you can see pieces of Roosevelt in
• 1:23:48
  Speaker 1: both parties. The modern Republican Party has inherited some of
• 1:23:52
  Speaker 1: this political style, the nationalism, the populism, the willingness to
• 1:23:55
  Speaker 1: challenge the party establishment, the belief in a strong presidency.
• 1:24:00
  Speaker 1: And the enormous personality dominates everything. But if you look
• 1:24:05
  Speaker 1: at what Roosevelt actually wanted government to do, regulate big business,
• 1:24:08
  Speaker 1: protect workers, provide greater economic security, use federal power to
• 1:24:12
  Speaker 1: address problems that states and private institutions couldn't solve. That
• 1:24:17
  Speaker 1: sounds like the modern Democratic Party. It's interesting. Some Republicans
• 1:24:22
  Speaker 1: who have become alienated from Donald Trump's version of the
• 1:24:25
  Speaker 1: party have found themselves voting for Democrats, even though they
• 1:24:27
  Speaker 1: don't necessarily think of themselves as Democrats. Now, those voters
• 1:24:31
  Speaker 1: aren't all Teddy Roosevelt progressives. Some are traditional conservatives who
• 1:24:34
  Speaker 1: simply don't recognize their old party anymore. But it's a
• 1:24:38
  Speaker 1: reminder that political coalitions change, and they change all the time.
• 1:24:42
  Speaker 1: And the ideas associated with a political tradition don't necessarily
• 1:24:45
  Speaker 1: remain inside the same party forever. Roosevelt and Trump share
• 1:24:49
  Speaker 1: some unmistakable personality traits, but their governing philosophies are actually
• 1:24:53
  Speaker 1: quite different. And so are the outcomes of their fights
• 1:24:56
  Speaker 1: with the Republican establishment. Roosevelt couldn't take control of the party,
• 1:25:01
  Speaker 1: so he left it. Trump took control of the party
• 1:25:03
  Speaker 1: from within. Now, Teddy Roosevelt's movement didn't survive as a party,
• 1:25:12
  Speaker 1: but his ideas were adopted. This is why third-party politics
• 1:25:16
  Speaker 1: isn't a waste of time. They may not win, but
• 1:25:18
  Speaker 1: they have enormous amounts of influence going down the road
• 1:25:21
  Speaker 1: when they have enough success to punish one of the
• 1:25:24
  Speaker 1: two parties. So he may have lost the fight for
• 1:25:31
  Speaker 1: his party. He didn't lose the larger argument about what
• 1:25:34
  Speaker 1: government could become. But that doesn't make him any less
• 1:25:39
  Speaker 1: of an egomaniac. The original line, bride at every wedding
• 1:25:44
  Speaker 1: and corpse at every funeral, which we all now use
• 1:25:47
  Speaker 1: to describe Trump, I think the line was invented to
• 1:25:51
  Speaker 1: describe Teddy Roosevelt. Okay. Shane here, still proudly hailing from
• 1:26:04
  Speaker 1: Missouri's original and controversial fifth district. Okay. If Democrats take
• 1:26:09
  Speaker 1: the House next month, who do you think will become
• 1:26:11
  Speaker 1: speaker and who do you think should get the job?
• 1:26:13
  Speaker 1: I know what Kim Jeffries would be the traditional choice
• 1:26:15
  Speaker 1: as minority leader, but with growing frustration over his leadership
• 1:26:18
  Speaker 1: and the party's direction, could someone else realistically emerge? Go Tigers, M-I-Z,
• 1:26:23
  Speaker 1: the Mizzou Tigers. Okay. Good weekend sort of proving that
• 1:26:29
  Speaker 1: you guys belong. You guys belong. I've been a doubter.
• 1:26:32
  Speaker 1: I still would like to see Mizzou win a significant
• 1:26:36
  Speaker 1: game on the road. I'm sure you do too. You know,
• 1:26:42
  Speaker 1: it's interesting with Jeffries. I, three years ago, three or
• 1:26:45
  Speaker 1: four years ago, would have said he was doing... He
• 1:26:48
  Speaker 1: seemed to be the perfect choice to be this guy
• 1:26:51
  Speaker 1: that could be a bridge between the two wings of
• 1:26:53
  Speaker 1: the party. And he still... He's still probably– it's interesting.
• 1:27:02
  Speaker 1: In theory, being close with the Congressional Black Caucus as
• 1:27:06
  Speaker 1: an African-American, he's been involved with CBC politics and coming
• 1:27:10
  Speaker 1: from New York City, which is really ground zero for
• 1:27:12
  Speaker 1: the socialist movement. So in theory, he's got one foot
• 1:27:15
  Speaker 1: literally in sort of both camps of the party. And
• 1:27:22
  Speaker 1: as somebody– as speaker, your job is to kind of
• 1:27:24
  Speaker 1: navigate that. not necessarily stamp it out. And, you know, so,
• 1:27:34
  Speaker 1: you know, you say, like, who would make a better speaker? Well,
• 1:27:38
  Speaker 1: you know, the other way to go would be you'd
• 1:27:40
  Speaker 1: go with a senior statesman of the party, somebody who
• 1:27:45
  Speaker 1: I actually think would have a lot of the good instincts.
• 1:27:49
  Speaker 1: It's sort of like, let's say progressives decide to deal
• 1:27:55
  Speaker 1: a blow to They just want to, you know, prove
• 1:28:00
  Speaker 1: that they can prevent Jeffries from becoming speaker. So just
• 1:28:03
  Speaker 1: to force another speaker. You know, do Democrats look for
• 1:28:11
  Speaker 1: a Mike Johnson type figure, somebody you've never heard of
• 1:28:14
  Speaker 1: that sort of will just sort of be a glue?
• 1:28:16
  Speaker 1: Do you go with a senior official, senior statesman who's
• 1:28:19
  Speaker 1: been involved, maybe part of a swing state? Like, you know,
• 1:28:22
  Speaker 1: I could see a Debbie Dingell, right, who has... been
• 1:28:26
  Speaker 1: in Congress a long time, was married to a long
• 1:28:28
  Speaker 1: time member of Congress, has been been on both sides
• 1:28:31
  Speaker 1: of these fights, has been sort of has figured out
• 1:28:36
  Speaker 1: how to navigate the Michigan fights pretty well. Maybe, you know,
• 1:28:42
  Speaker 1: maybe that, you know, but in theory, Jeffries should be
• 1:28:47
  Speaker 1: the right person. So we'll just fight. Look, this just
• 1:28:51
  Speaker 1: takes pretty deaf skill. And, you know, who's, it's, I
• 1:28:57
  Speaker 1: think somebody who has executive experience would be better at this.
• 1:29:01
  Speaker 1: I'm trying to think if there are any former mayors
• 1:29:04
  Speaker 1: sitting in the– I'm sure there's a handful of former mayors.
• 1:29:07
  Speaker 1: But somebody who's dealt with– a former governor might be
• 1:29:10
  Speaker 1: better suited as Speaker of the House. Now, there's– it's
• 1:29:16
  Speaker 1: going to come from somebody within. But– and I can't–
• 1:29:21
  Speaker 1: I don't think there's any former governors that are suddenly
• 1:29:23
  Speaker 1: popping up in Congress right now. but somebody that's dealt
• 1:29:27
  Speaker 1: with a, with a legislature from, you know, with multiple
• 1:29:30
  Speaker 1: factions and stuff. And that would probably has a better skillset.
• 1:29:34
  Speaker 1: But in theory, Jeffries has watched this happen and has
• 1:29:37
  Speaker 1: been navigating this stuff. So boy, if it's not him,
• 1:29:42
  Speaker 1: I think that they're going to have a hard time finding,
• 1:29:46
  Speaker 1: finding that next person. And in fact, I guess you
• 1:29:49
  Speaker 1: would say, you know, who's, who's both, You know, the
• 1:29:56
  Speaker 1: curiosity I have about Jeffries is, is he going to
• 1:29:58
  Speaker 1: be any good of a spokesperson or is he going
• 1:30:00
  Speaker 1: to be afraid to alienate any faction inside the party
• 1:30:05
  Speaker 1: for his own? I think a lot of it depends
• 1:30:07
  Speaker 1: on the number, right? Ultimately, right? If there's 200, if
• 1:30:11
  Speaker 1: Democrats have 235 or more, Jeffries has a lot easier
• 1:30:16
  Speaker 1: of a time, you know, because the bigger the number is,
• 1:30:19
  Speaker 1: the more moderates that are going to win. The smaller
• 1:30:25
  Speaker 1: the number is, the fewer moderates that are there. And
• 1:30:27
  Speaker 1: the more moderates he has to sort of be a
• 1:30:29
  Speaker 1: counter to the block is, I guess, what the socialist
• 1:30:33
  Speaker 1: adjacent progressive wing calls itself. That probably dilutes it a
• 1:30:39
  Speaker 1: little bit and allows the presidential primary campaign to be
• 1:30:43
  Speaker 1: the relief valve for these fights. You know, if I'm Jeffries,
• 1:30:46
  Speaker 1: I don't want these fights inside my caucus and my conference.
• 1:30:51
  Speaker 1: let these factional fights play out in the primary campaign trail.
• 1:30:58
  Speaker 1: I think he's been preparing for this for quite some time.
• 1:31:00
  Speaker 1: So if he's not ready, then he'll never be ready.
• 1:31:06
  Speaker 1: All right. Chuck L writes in. All right. Big fan
• 1:31:10
  Speaker 1: from South Bend, Indiana, second congressional district in Northern Indiana
• 1:31:14
  Speaker 1: up there. Yeah. If we wake up on November 4th
• 1:31:15
  Speaker 1: to a better than expected showing for Republicans, what do
• 1:31:18
  Speaker 1: you think the story would be about how we got here?
• 1:31:20
  Speaker 1: What factors might we have overlooked it or underestimated heading
• 1:31:23
  Speaker 1: into election day. Thank you and go Irish. Well, the
• 1:31:25
  Speaker 1: simplest is the Trump voter showed up. Independence didn't go
• 1:31:34
  Speaker 1: by 20 plus points for Democrats. Maybe they only went
• 1:31:37
  Speaker 1: by 10, you know, eight to 10 points. I think
• 1:31:44
  Speaker 1: one other thing will have had to happen that hasn't
• 1:31:46
  Speaker 1: happened here yet. And that is somehow, Maybe the war–
• 1:31:52
  Speaker 1: that there is a– it really actually looks like the
• 1:31:55
  Speaker 1: war is ending and we really actually start to see
• 1:32:00
  Speaker 1: an immediate financial consequence to it, right? Like a quick
• 1:32:06
  Speaker 1: 15-cent drop in the price of gas in the last
• 1:32:08
  Speaker 1: 10 days of the election, right? If you're asking me
• 1:32:12
  Speaker 1: for a scenario, it's possible we're underreporting. then the Republican
• 1:32:19
  Speaker 1: vote that is that nobody can encounter will show up.
• 1:32:23
  Speaker 1: I will just say that midterm polls tend to be
• 1:32:25
  Speaker 1: more accurate than presidential polls, and they're less likely to
• 1:32:28
  Speaker 1: miss that vote. But that's the explanation is I think,
• 1:32:33
  Speaker 1: but I think something has to, I think, I think there,
• 1:32:35
  Speaker 1: I think there will be a outside development, right? Like
• 1:32:42
  Speaker 1: believable signs that the war is ending. I say ended,
• 1:32:45
  Speaker 1: but ending. And cause you, because literally the price of
• 1:32:48
  Speaker 1: oil drops $ 20 in the market, which then has all
• 1:32:54
  Speaker 1: those after-out effects. But I really think that's what it
• 1:32:56
  Speaker 1: would have to be, something that dramatic. Trust me, I
• 1:33:06
  Speaker 1: want more counterfactuals. I keep looking for more counterfactuals. I'm
• 1:33:10
  Speaker 1: having a hard time finding. The other part is, The
• 1:33:14
  Speaker 1: other explanation is this entire election is being held on
• 1:33:19
  Speaker 1: sort of red-leaning territory, whether it's redistricted congressional districts, the
• 1:33:24
  Speaker 1: Senate races, right? You know, there's only one Senate race,
• 1:33:30
  Speaker 1: competitive Senate race in a state that Kamala Harris won,
• 1:33:33
  Speaker 1: and that's Maine, right? Everything else is in a state
• 1:33:36
  Speaker 1: that Trump either won narrowly or by a lot. So
• 1:33:39
  Speaker 1: that would be the other explanation is that, hey, remember,
• 1:33:41
  Speaker 1: this was an away game and it's tough to win
• 1:33:43
  Speaker 1: a road game. to put it in some football terms,
• 1:33:47
  Speaker 1: to put it in terms of how I'll explain a
• 1:33:52
  Speaker 1: loss to Notre Dame, even though Miami shouldn't be losing
• 1:33:54
  Speaker 1: to Notre Dame. Thanks, Chuck. All right. John S. from Glendale,
• 1:33:59
  Speaker 1: Wisconsin's 4th District chimes in. He says, hey, keep up
• 1:34:01
  Speaker 1: the awesome work. You make my walks fly by. With
• 1:34:04
  Speaker 1: the Supreme Court's presidential immunity ruling, I'm surprised there hasn't
• 1:34:06
  Speaker 1: been a push for a constitutional amendment to hold presidents
• 1:34:09
  Speaker 1: accountable under the law like the rest of us. Can
• 1:34:11
  Speaker 1: you explain the different Ways a constitutional amendment can be
• 1:34:14
  Speaker 1: proposed and ratified, including the process involving the states. Go, Pat, go.
• 1:34:17
  Speaker 1: Although things aren't looking too promising until LeFleur is gone. Ah,
• 1:34:20
  Speaker 1: you're on the LeFleur's got to go bandwagon too. Yeah,
• 1:34:23
  Speaker 1: I know. We all are there. It is what it is.
• 1:34:25
  Speaker 1: It just feels like, although I sort of hold the
• 1:34:28
  Speaker 1: GM slightly more accountable. You know, LeFleur, I still believe
• 1:34:33
  Speaker 1: in him as a play designer and a play caller.
• 1:34:36
  Speaker 1: If you don't have an offensive line, it's tough to
• 1:34:38
  Speaker 1: call plays. So I'm sort of mixed on you there. Look,
• 1:34:43
  Speaker 1: there's plenty of ways, right? A member of Congress can
• 1:34:46
  Speaker 1: file a constitutional amendment. There's plenty that have done so already.
• 1:34:50
  Speaker 1: There's the Pardon Nullification Act that Johnny O, a Democratic
• 1:34:54
  Speaker 1: member of Congress from Baltimore, proposed. Don Bacon, Republican from Omaha,
• 1:34:58
  Speaker 1: has already signed on to it. And I think that's,
• 1:35:02
  Speaker 1: you know, but there are, you can do it. There
• 1:35:05
  Speaker 1: are plenty of ways to do this, but the easiest
• 1:35:07
  Speaker 1: would be as introducing as a, to get it passed
• 1:35:10
  Speaker 1: in Congress first because it gives it– then you can
• 1:35:13
  Speaker 1: start moving it around into the states. But yeah, wording
• 1:35:20
  Speaker 1: that would– I think– but there's no doubt we need a–
• 1:35:24
  Speaker 1: there's quite a few things we need constitutional amendments for.
• 1:35:28
  Speaker 1: If we're going to regulate money in politics, clearly we
• 1:35:30
  Speaker 1: need a constitutional amendment and I think there's more desire
• 1:35:33
  Speaker 1: for some authority to do this. We're going to need
• 1:35:36
  Speaker 1: a constitutional amendment to decide some presidential authority. given the
• 1:35:42
  Speaker 1: interpretation of things. So I do think there's a few
• 1:35:45
  Speaker 1: things that need to be changed there, whether it's access
• 1:35:50
  Speaker 1: to a president's finances, forcing disclosure of that, that presidents
• 1:35:56
  Speaker 1: and vice presidents have to disclose certain things. So I
• 1:35:59
  Speaker 1: think there's quite a bit of constitutional action. And I
• 1:36:02
  Speaker 1: actually expect there's more happening in Congress than you might realize,
• 1:36:05
  Speaker 1: quite a few members. And I think, especially if this
• 1:36:08
  Speaker 1: is a big anti-Trump election. That's why I call it anti-Trump,
• 1:36:13
  Speaker 1: not necessarily pro-democratic, but it's just anti-Trump. You'll see quite
• 1:36:17
  Speaker 1: a few members, I think, introduce various... I mean, look,
• 1:36:22
  Speaker 1: as you've heard me say before, Donald Trump's been the
• 1:36:25
  Speaker 1: black light on American democracy. He's exposed all the dirty
• 1:36:28
  Speaker 1: parts that we need to fix and we need to
• 1:36:30
  Speaker 1: clean up. Oh, another– all right. Chris from Roscoe, Illinois, Illinois'
• 1:36:38
  Speaker 1: 16th district, making my second attempt at the Five Timers
• 1:36:41
  Speaker 1: Club with Trump traveling around the country to campaign in
• 1:36:43
  Speaker 1: various state races. This midterm cycle, who actually picks up
• 1:36:47
  Speaker 1: the tab for all that travel? Are these trips paid
• 1:36:48
  Speaker 1: for by campaigns, taxpayers, or some combo of the two?
• 1:36:51
  Speaker 1: Keep up the great work. Go Packers and Brewers. Yes,
• 1:36:55
  Speaker 1: as Packer fans, we are trying to– I am struggling
• 1:36:59
  Speaker 1: myself between my old Dodger ties and the Brewers, but
• 1:37:02
  Speaker 1: I have no– I have no I have no negative
• 1:37:05
  Speaker 1: feelings towards the Brewers. I want to see them get
• 1:37:08
  Speaker 1: off the world stage myself. And I know so many
• 1:37:12
  Speaker 1: of my fellow Packer fans are fans. So it's such
• 1:37:16
  Speaker 1: a crummy Packer season. So at least the Brewers and
• 1:37:20
  Speaker 1: the NBA screwed you with Yama. So at least you
• 1:37:22
  Speaker 1: got the Brewers. Look, these things are sometimes administrations create
• 1:37:28
  Speaker 1: some sort of, you know, official part of a response
• 1:37:32
  Speaker 1: or something. that allows them to look, you know, get
• 1:37:35
  Speaker 1: some of it paid for by the taxpayers. But a
• 1:37:37
  Speaker 1: lot of it is look, just moving the president around.
• 1:37:40
  Speaker 1: Most of it's picked up by taxpayers. There's some reimbursements,
• 1:37:43
  Speaker 1: but like, it's like the equivalent of first-class airfare. You're
• 1:37:47
  Speaker 1: still like inside the bubble. You're still talking millions of
• 1:37:49
  Speaker 1: dollars of taxpayer dollars used, but this is, this is every,
• 1:37:55
  Speaker 1: doesn't matter the party of the president, right? This is
• 1:37:57
  Speaker 1: always the case, but there's a formula that literally is
• 1:38:00
  Speaker 1: written into how you, you do it. And, why they
• 1:38:03
  Speaker 1: have to say certain, they'll say certain things, but it's
• 1:38:07
  Speaker 1: campaigns have to reimburse to a point. But when you
• 1:38:11
  Speaker 1: look at how much the raw numbers that they actually
• 1:38:13
  Speaker 1: reimburse versus what it actually would cost to move Air
• 1:38:18
  Speaker 1: Force One, it's chump change. But like I said, it's
• 1:38:21
  Speaker 1: like equivalent of first class airfare, things like that. It's it's.
• 1:38:28
  Speaker 1: It's the illusion of of having campaigns pay for it
• 1:38:33
  Speaker 1: without it being incredibly costly to campaigns for them to
• 1:38:36
  Speaker 1: pay for. Our last question before I get into my
• 1:38:41
  Speaker 1: wrap up football wrap up, Brad from Stanley, North Carolina,
• 1:38:44
  Speaker 1: 14th congressional district there. hoping to become a two-timer. I've
• 1:38:47
  Speaker 1: trained my kids to mute political ads, but lately I've
• 1:38:50
  Speaker 1: noticed a pro-Annie Andrews super PAC ad attacking Darlene Graham
• 1:38:55
  Speaker 1: airing repeatedly in the Charlotte market, which also reaches South Carolina.
• 1:38:58
  Speaker 1: Between those ads and Trump's recent homophobic attack on Andrews,
• 1:39:01
  Speaker 1: could her growing name recognition force Graham to speak out
• 1:39:04
  Speaker 1: more and potentially make some costly missteps? Just wanted to
• 1:39:06
  Speaker 1: share some observations from here in North Carolina. Stay awesome,
• 1:39:09
  Speaker 1: go Duke, and hope you're enjoying. our former quarterback down
• 1:39:12
  Speaker 1: in Miami. Oh, yes, I am. He's quite something. Thank
• 1:39:15
  Speaker 1: you for Mensa. And I hope you're enjoying the extra
• 1:39:18
  Speaker 1: cash we gave your program to then help dominate us
• 1:39:22
  Speaker 1: in college basketball down the road. Because Miami did have
• 1:39:26
  Speaker 1: to pay for Mensa and then some to keep their lawsuit,
• 1:39:32
  Speaker 1: to make sure Duke dropped their lawsuit. But it was
• 1:39:35
  Speaker 1: probably the right thing for everybody. Look, I think Annie
• 1:39:39
  Speaker 1: Andrews is, you know, look, let's, She got Darlene Graham
• 1:39:43
  Speaker 1: to debate. That in itself is important. And I agree
• 1:39:50
  Speaker 1: with you. Any opportunity, I think, where she showcases what
• 1:39:54
  Speaker 1: she doesn't know is potentially a problem. But I brought
• 1:39:57
  Speaker 1: her up in my opening monologue. I mean, the signature
• 1:40:02
  Speaker 1: bill she helped carry over the finish line of her
• 1:40:04
  Speaker 1: brothers is being undermined by Donald Trump's behavior and pro-Putin
• 1:40:08
  Speaker 1: and anti-Ukraine instincts. Yeah. So look, Andrews has real money.
• 1:40:18
  Speaker 1: It's funny, I'm seeing a few more national dollars going
• 1:40:21
  Speaker 1: into South Carolina. I had one person indicate, you know,
• 1:40:24
  Speaker 1: there's some, I'll share with you a few pieces of
• 1:40:27
  Speaker 1: intel I've gotten lately. Apparently the Senate Republicans have done,
• 1:40:32
  Speaker 1: you know, they do weekly survey work of Trump and
• 1:40:34
  Speaker 1: all their Senate states. Trump's upside down in every single
• 1:40:37
  Speaker 1: state where there's a US Senate race. except Idaho, and
• 1:40:41
  Speaker 1: he's only right side up by two points. And Idaho
• 1:40:44
  Speaker 1: is home of the one where we have one of
• 1:40:45
  Speaker 1: those independent candidates running against the Republican Jim Risch, who's
• 1:40:50
  Speaker 1: in his 80s and it's become an issue. Todd Achilles
• 1:40:53
  Speaker 1: is the independent candidate. He's going to get in the
• 1:40:56
  Speaker 1: low 40s. The question is, how competitive is this going
• 1:40:58
  Speaker 1: to get? And I'm fascinated. I have a feeling it
• 1:41:02
  Speaker 1: could get into mid to low single digits there. But
• 1:41:05
  Speaker 1: I think that tells you the larger national environment. That's
• 1:41:09
  Speaker 1: for sure. But a Republican strategist whispered to one source,
• 1:41:18
  Speaker 1: if the Democrats had extra money, South Carolina would be vulnerable.
• 1:41:22
  Speaker 1: And they simply think they're going to survive South Carolina
• 1:41:25
  Speaker 1: because Democrats don't have enough money to sort of expand
• 1:41:29
  Speaker 1: to what they need to make South Carolina and Mississippi
• 1:41:33
  Speaker 1: potentially winnable. that they've kind of hit a wall of money.
• 1:41:37
  Speaker 1: Part of it is Kansas is winnable, but suddenly a
• 1:41:39
  Speaker 1: bunch of money is going into Kansas. Ohio is winnable,
• 1:41:41
  Speaker 1: but a bunch of money is going there. So it's
• 1:41:44
  Speaker 1: the question of do you dilute your investments in Kansas, Iowa,
• 1:41:48
  Speaker 1: and Ohio to see if you can hit a lottery
• 1:41:51
  Speaker 1: ticket in South Carolina or Mississippi, or do you stick
• 1:41:55
  Speaker 1: to your seven targets and then maybe hope that some
• 1:41:59
  Speaker 1: outside entity decides to take a hobbyist interest in one
• 1:42:02
  Speaker 1: of those three states, Nebraska? Mississippi, South Carolina, the next
• 1:42:06
  Speaker 1: three on the list. But look, Darlene Graham fits all
• 1:42:12
  Speaker 1: of the historical boxes that you would check for a
• 1:42:20
  Speaker 1: surprise loser. Appointed senators underperformed. Lindsey Graham underperformed a lot.
• 1:42:26
  Speaker 1: He wasn't really connected to the MAGA base very well.
• 1:42:29
  Speaker 1: I mean, you know, Annie Andrews is, you know, sort
• 1:42:35
  Speaker 1: of has not been, she just doesn't have enough to
• 1:42:39
  Speaker 1: be somebody to run against. They haven't been able to
• 1:42:42
  Speaker 1: demonize her. Trump has tried a little bit. So, you know,
• 1:42:46
  Speaker 1: I do expect this race to be a three or
• 1:42:48
  Speaker 1: four point race. And if you, once you're down to
• 1:42:50
  Speaker 1: three or four points, then it's possibly winnable. I do
• 1:42:54
  Speaker 1: think Democrats have made a mistake not targeting this. The
• 1:42:57
  Speaker 1: minute Darlene Graham narrowly won that runoff, this was a
• 1:43:00
  Speaker 1: winnable race. But again, I understand if you're going to
• 1:43:06
  Speaker 1: go all-in on Kansas, you can't just sort of go
• 1:43:08
  Speaker 1: half-in in these places. You've got to decide. And Kansas
• 1:43:11
  Speaker 1: is definitely, I think, more winnable at this point than
• 1:43:14
  Speaker 1: South Carolina. But if you're looking at South Carolina, Nebraska,
• 1:43:17
  Speaker 1: and Mississippi, the next one on the board is South Carolina.
• 1:43:22
  Speaker 1: All right, that's questions. A few thoughts on college football
• 1:43:28
  Speaker 1: this weekend. Look, I will sort of say it is–
• 1:43:33
  Speaker 1: I think we now know the Texas offense is what
• 1:43:36
  Speaker 1: we think it is. Not that good. And the question is,
• 1:43:39
  Speaker 1: is this a Sark issue? Is this Sarkeesian's offense that
• 1:43:43
  Speaker 1: Arch doesn't understand? Does he not design play calls that
• 1:43:46
  Speaker 1: work for Arch? Or is Arch a choker himself, right? Like,
• 1:43:51
  Speaker 1: you know, that was a rough second half for him.
• 1:43:54
  Speaker 1: But either way, the offense isn't working. The best player
• 1:43:57
  Speaker 1: on offense is Coleman. I mean, he made some spectacular
• 1:44:00
  Speaker 1: catches that almost bailed Texas out of this thing. But
• 1:44:03
  Speaker 1: we know there's not much to this Oklahoma offense. And
• 1:44:07
  Speaker 1: we know that this was going to be the best effort. Look,
• 1:44:09
  Speaker 1: Texas is a championship defense. There's no doubt in my
• 1:44:11
  Speaker 1: mind they have a championship defense. But there's real question
• 1:44:14
  Speaker 1: marks about whether they have a good enough offense to
• 1:44:17
  Speaker 1: win the whole thing. When I look at sort of
• 1:44:20
  Speaker 1: how close Miami got last year in Indiana, look, Miami
• 1:44:25
  Speaker 1: always had a championship defense last year. The question was,
• 1:44:28
  Speaker 1: is the offense good enough? And the offense got good enough.
• 1:44:31
  Speaker 1: As Carson Beck got healthier, you really saw it in
• 1:44:34
  Speaker 1: their offense. When they had to do a shootout with
• 1:44:35
  Speaker 1: Ole Miss, they could do a shootout. They had enough.
• 1:44:39
  Speaker 1: You see this with Georgia. Georgia has enough. I think
• 1:44:41
  Speaker 1: right now, Georgia's number one. I think you look at
• 1:44:47
  Speaker 1: what they've done. I will concede because of a slightly
• 1:44:51
  Speaker 1: tougher schedule so far. I'd put Notre Dame two. And
• 1:44:56
  Speaker 1: I'd put Miami three if you're going to go your one, two,
• 1:44:59
  Speaker 1: three there. I think at that point, I don't know
• 1:45:06
  Speaker 1: what to think of Indiana. Nebraska should have won that game.
• 1:45:11
  Speaker 1: Nebraska lost that game in the first half when they
• 1:45:14
  Speaker 1: didn't put enough points. Their advantage in the first half
• 1:45:17
  Speaker 1: should have given them a double-digit lead at halftime, and
• 1:45:19
  Speaker 1: it didn't. So I think they left too many points
• 1:45:22
  Speaker 1: on the board. Basically, you can't leave a well-coached team
• 1:45:25
  Speaker 1: that much time. But how many times are we going
• 1:45:27
  Speaker 1: to watch Indiana underperform on offense? Is Hoover good enough?
• 1:45:30
  Speaker 1: He looked a little bit better in the second half
• 1:45:33
  Speaker 1: of that game. Obviously, we're going to find out a
• 1:45:35
  Speaker 1: lot about Indiana and Ohio State. That's, you know, and
• 1:45:44
  Speaker 1: at this point, just like the Georgia-Alabama game, it's likely
• 1:45:47
  Speaker 1: at this point, winner gets the buy, right? Loser gets
• 1:45:51
  Speaker 1: to host, probably host a game, but has to play
• 1:45:53
  Speaker 1: an extra game in the playoff. That's probably what we
• 1:45:57
  Speaker 1: just saw take place, both in Georgia, Alabama. That's what
• 1:46:01
  Speaker 1: that means. And I think for Indiana, Ohio State, that
• 1:46:04
  Speaker 1: will that mean. And it may be what Miami, Notre
• 1:46:07
  Speaker 1: Dame ends up being about. Now, Miami's got Florida State.
• 1:46:10
  Speaker 1: It's Florida State week. I wanted Florida State to win
• 1:46:13
  Speaker 1: on Friday because I didn't want a basically a desperate
• 1:46:17
  Speaker 1: Florida State team whose season is on the brink of.
• 1:46:22
  Speaker 1: It's definitely, you know. The season goes from bad to
• 1:46:25
  Speaker 1: worse if they lose badly to Miami. And so I
• 1:46:28
  Speaker 1: expect they've fired up Seminole team. In Miami's worst years,
• 1:46:32
  Speaker 1: they still gave Florida State in its best years a
• 1:46:34
  Speaker 1: tough game. I expect the same thing. Everybody knows each other.
• 1:46:38
  Speaker 1: Very concerned about this. The only good news is I
• 1:46:43
  Speaker 1: think Mario cares about this game. But I don't want
• 1:46:45
  Speaker 1: to see what happened last year where we got the
• 1:46:47
  Speaker 1: big lead and then we just sat on it at
• 1:46:49
  Speaker 1: the end. They were so afraid of Carson Beck making mistakes.
• 1:46:54
  Speaker 1: And I remember thinking that, watching how they were managing
• 1:46:58
  Speaker 1: that fourth quarter, they would not throw the ball at all.
• 1:47:00
  Speaker 1: They were so nervous about it. Back then, it was
• 1:47:04
  Speaker 1: clear they had not yet trusted Carson Beck to run
• 1:47:06
  Speaker 1: the full offense. That is not the case with Mensah
• 1:47:09
  Speaker 1: this time. So I got to think that they know
• 1:47:11
  Speaker 1: how to shut the door. And we basically figured out
• 1:47:16
  Speaker 1: how to shut the door against Clemson. I really like that.
• 1:47:18
  Speaker 1: That's something I'd like to see there. I plan to
• 1:47:21
  Speaker 1: be there. I was supposed to be at the Louisville game,
• 1:47:23
  Speaker 1: but the storm got in the way and we decided
• 1:47:26
  Speaker 1: we had all sorts of other issues why we couldn't
• 1:47:27
  Speaker 1: get to the Florida State-Louisville game. But I look forward
• 1:47:30
  Speaker 1: to going down this weekend for Miami-Florida State. Third straight
• 1:47:34
  Speaker 1: year I've been able to see the Miami-Florida State game
• 1:47:37
  Speaker 1: in person, and we are looking forward to that. So
• 1:47:42
  Speaker 1: it is a, obviously the game of the week next
• 1:47:45
  Speaker 1: week is all things Indiana-Ohio State. But In my household, Miami,
• 1:47:50
  Speaker 1: Florida State will be the dominant conversation. A few other
• 1:47:53
  Speaker 1: things that we learned. I think we learned Florida. Is
• 1:47:55
  Speaker 1: it possible that Florida's the overrated team? Basically now they've
• 1:48:04
  Speaker 1: lost to South Carolina and they've lost to Mizzou and
• 1:48:06
  Speaker 1: they beat Ole Miss. This was more about Ole Miss
• 1:48:09
  Speaker 1: having a bad game following its big win over LSU
• 1:48:11
  Speaker 1: than anything else. So I think when you're starting to
• 1:48:16
  Speaker 1: rank your SEC schools, you have Georgia, Alabama, The key
• 1:48:19
  Speaker 1: and output. Texas in the third slot, and I think
• 1:48:21
  Speaker 1: you put Ole Miss in the fourth slot. And I
• 1:48:24
  Speaker 1: got to ask this question. LSU, they're out? Is Kentucky in?
• 1:48:30
  Speaker 1: By the way, UCLA? Was that a win by UCLA
• 1:48:34
  Speaker 1: or a loss by Oregon? Have you seen the rest
• 1:48:39
  Speaker 1: of UCLA's schedule? UCLA's going to be in the playoff, folks.
• 1:48:45
  Speaker 1: The fact is, here come their this year's Indiana stories,
• 1:48:49
  Speaker 1: even more so than before. But man, it's interesting. They
• 1:48:54
  Speaker 1: don't have to play Ohio State or Indiana, but they
• 1:48:56
  Speaker 1: have Wisconsin and Minnesota on their schedule. Mark this down.
• 1:49:00
  Speaker 1: They're going to lose one of those two. I know
• 1:49:05
  Speaker 1: this week, I'd be... I'd be looking for whoever's playing UCLA.
• 1:49:10
  Speaker 1: It's hard to imagine. It's hard to imagine they're going
• 1:49:14
  Speaker 1: to pull off, keep this rolling the way they do.
• 1:49:18
  Speaker 1: But hey, guess what? A lot of people lost money
• 1:49:20
  Speaker 1: chasing that elusive loss for Indiana that never came to
• 1:49:23
  Speaker 1: be last year. So you never know. But yeah, I
• 1:49:27
  Speaker 1: think the two big things we learned over the weekend,
• 1:49:31
  Speaker 1: Florida's not a playoff team. And I don't know if
• 1:49:35
  Speaker 1: Texas is either. All right. I whispered it because I
• 1:49:38
  Speaker 1: got too many friends who are UT fans that I
• 1:49:40
  Speaker 1: don't want to hear their complaints. You only have one loss.
• 1:49:45
  Speaker 1: You're not out of it yet. But I think you're
• 1:49:51
  Speaker 1: not a nine and three team that feels like you
• 1:49:53
  Speaker 1: are going to get the benefit of the doubt. That's
• 1:49:56
  Speaker 1: just something I think about. All right. With that, I'll
• 1:49:59
  Speaker 1: see you in 24 hours with Super Tuesday. Thanks for listening.
• 1:50:02
  Speaker 1: And until we upload again.