Latest / The Chuck ToddCast / Full Episode - The Democrats’ Primary Calendar Is Built To Stymie The Progressive Left In ‘28 + How Money Has Reshaped Professional & College Sports

Transcript

Full Episode - The Democrats’ Primary Calendar Is Built To Stymie The Progressive Left In ‘28 + How Money Has Reshaped Professional & College Sports · The Chuck ToddCast

0:00
Speaker 1: This episode of The Chuck Podcast is brought to you
0:02
Speaker 1: by Chapter. Now, almost everything you hear about medicare is
0:06
Speaker 1: somebody quietly trying to steer you somewhere, and you're skeptical
0:12
Speaker 1: of that, as you should be. I get it. I mean,
0:14
Speaker 1: there's a federal lawsuit going on right now over exactly
0:18
Speaker 1: this companies that branded themselves as unbiased while allegedly pointing
0:22
Speaker 1: people toward whatever would pay them the most, as some
0:26
Speaker 1: sort of broker. So if your default is to distrust
0:28
Speaker 1: everyone in this space, honestly, I get it. I'm a
0:31
Speaker 1: bit distrustful these days myself. That's the whole reason I
0:34
Speaker 1: want to tell you about Chapter. They're independent medicare advisors
0:38
Speaker 1: whose entire model is that their advisors are not paid
0:42
Speaker 1: to push any one plan. They're just trying to help. Yes,
0:46
Speaker 1: there's compensation that goes with it, but it's across the
0:49
Speaker 1: board is what they're trying to do. At the end
0:51
Speaker 1: of the day, they're advocating for you. They're not the
0:53
Speaker 1: insurance companies themselves. They're an actual person who actually goes
0:57
Speaker 1: through your doctors, your prescriptions needs, and then compares them
1:02
Speaker 1: to every single plan available to find the best one.
1:05
Speaker 1: That will work for you and hopefully send save you
1:07
Speaker 1: a couple of dollars too. And here's the part that
1:11
Speaker 1: sets Chapter apart. They don't disappear once you've been in
1:14
Speaker 1: a role. 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: When I like about these Chapter folks, I've spent time
1:44
Speaker 1: with them. This is a very transparent organization. It is Medicare,
1:49
Speaker 1: 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 this cup deicism
2:00
Speaker 1: you already have in all of this, point it out
2:02
Speaker 1: your own plan for twenty minutes. It's free, there's no pressure,
2:06
Speaker 1: and then call Chapter today at nine eight zero seven
2:09
Speaker 1: three four three nine eight five. Hello thereon, Welcome to
2:18
Speaker 1: the Monday episode of the Chuck Podcast. Got a lot
2:22
Speaker 1: that has happened in the last four days, whether it's
2:25
Speaker 1: small stuff or big stuff. Nuclear proliferation in the Middle East.
2:29
Speaker 1: I'd argue that's big stuff. Unbelievable rhetoric that is literally
2:34
Speaker 1: not believable when all things coming to a run. How
2:40
Speaker 1: Donald Trump is trying to make life harder for Republicans
2:43
Speaker 1: in the mid terms with his constant celebration of tax
2:47
Speaker 1: hikes on American consumers. He calls them tariffs, but they
2:50
Speaker 1: are what they are on that front. Got obviously, this
2:54
Speaker 1: is the Monday episode. We'll have a time machine my
2:56
Speaker 1: interview today. JOHNA. Oron he is somebody here and I
2:59
Speaker 1: share a publication on our resume. We're both former employees
3:04
Speaker 1: of the sports business daily Slash Journal. I was, of
3:08
Speaker 1: course one of the founders of that publication. He was
3:11
Speaker 1: one of their chief correspondents for a long time. He
3:14
Speaker 1: now does sports business for Puck And so we spend
3:17
Speaker 1: a good hour talking about what's happening in the world
3:21
Speaker 1: of sports. And here's why you should care, because these
3:25
Speaker 1: big media companies are spending all this money on the
3:27
Speaker 1: rights of sports, and what are they doing. They're starving
3:30
Speaker 1: their journalism, They're basically destroying their news organizations in order
3:35
Speaker 1: to continue to stay relevant in the world of sports.
3:40
Speaker 1: And it has become a trade off. Whether it was
3:43
Speaker 1: supposedly a trade off, was ever supposed to be a
3:46
Speaker 1: trade off, it has been. We also talked a little
3:50
Speaker 1: bit about the infusion of politics into sports, what's good,
3:53
Speaker 1: what's bad, And it's a topic actually I will delve
3:56
Speaker 1: into today. My time machine is a out an anniversary
4:01
Speaker 1: that will be celebrating this week that I would argue
4:06
Speaker 1: is as important as July fourth, seventeen seventy six. That's
4:12
Speaker 1: how important what happened on July twenty eighth, eighteen sixty eight.
4:22
Speaker 1: So I gave you a big, big, big, big, big
4:24
Speaker 1: big clue, but how important that date is. And we're
4:28
Speaker 1: going to spend a little time there, and of course
4:29
Speaker 1: I will take your questions. But look, I'm spending my
4:32
Speaker 1: alliance share of my podcast on the primary calendar. You
4:38
Speaker 1: may think, wait, what the primary calendar? A whole podcast
4:42
Speaker 1: about a primary calendar? Right? Are we talking about practice now?
4:47
Speaker 1: And it may sound like inside Baseball, But after covering
4:50
Speaker 1: presidential campaigns for more than thirty years. I can tell
4:53
Speaker 1: you this. If you want to understand what kind of
4:54
Speaker 1: nominee a political party wants, don't start with the speeches,
5:00
Speaker 1: start with the rules. This announcement of the calendar is
5:03
Speaker 1: this not a logistics announcement, This isn't a scheduling announcement.
5:07
Speaker 1: This is the entire frickin' ballgame about who's who the
5:12
Speaker 1: party wants to be or what kind of candidate they
5:15
Speaker 1: want to have as their standard bearer in twenty twenty eight. Right,
5:20
Speaker 1: Because the primary calendar determines a lot, particularly the state
5:24
Speaker 1: that goes first and then of course the state that
5:26
Speaker 1: goes last in the early window, which we're going to
5:28
Speaker 1: get into. But this calendar determines where candidates spend their time,
5:31
Speaker 1: which means what actual voters are they absorbing information from
5:36
Speaker 1: That matters a lot. We saw what Iowa being first
5:39
Speaker 1: in the nation meant we have ethanol all over the place. Okay,
5:43
Speaker 1: corn based fuel is a thing because Iowa was first
5:47
Speaker 1: in the nation. Right, the first state matters a ton.
5:51
Speaker 1: Where candidates spend their time matters a ton, and that
5:54
Speaker 1: has now changed. While it's technically this is secically the
5:58
Speaker 1: second cycle in a row, South Carolina is lee. This
6:00
Speaker 1: is the first cycle. It's really going to mean something
6:03
Speaker 1: that it is leading off since twenty twenty four, in theory,
6:06
Speaker 1: was a reelection. It tells you what kind of voters
6:09
Speaker 1: they have to deal with, who they want to persuade,
6:11
Speaker 1: which issues get emphasized, what organizations get built, who survives,
6:15
Speaker 1: who disappear. So the point is, I've watched these campaigns
6:19
Speaker 1: over the years, spend millions of dollars building organizations, and
6:23
Speaker 1: ultimately what you end up realizing is and why this calendar.
6:26
Speaker 1: What matters is the first date. This is the Ricky
6:29
Speaker 1: Bob Rickey Bobby rule. You ain't first your last, because
6:33
Speaker 1: no other state matters. If you don't survive campaigning in
6:38
Speaker 1: the first day doesn't mean you have to win the
6:39
Speaker 1: first contest, but you can't come in last. You can't
6:44
Speaker 1: essentially be rejected by the elector. And so in that sense,
6:51
Speaker 1: just remember the on the other states only matter New Hampshire, Michigan,
6:56
Speaker 1: all these other Nevada, New Mexico, go in Virginia. Who
7:00
Speaker 1: are the two new editions? None of them matter until
7:04
Speaker 1: you survive South Carolina because there is only one first day,
7:11
Speaker 1: and that's the biggest lesson I've taken away from covering
7:14
Speaker 1: presidential politics is that no matter how many times they
7:16
Speaker 1: tried to tweak the calendar to dilute the importance at
7:20
Speaker 1: the time of Iowa New Hampshire as basically first caucus,
7:22
Speaker 1: first primary, and this has been that way essentially going.
7:26
Speaker 1: We really haven't had a serious presidential campaign in either
7:30
Speaker 1: side where Iowa didn't start, and now twenty twenty eight,
7:33
Speaker 1: we are going to have our first one in my
7:36
Speaker 1: lifetime where Iowa doesn't start, at least on the Democratic side.
7:40
Speaker 1: I was likely to still start on the Republican side
7:42
Speaker 1: for what it's worth, but this is a huge deal
7:46
Speaker 1: and it is going to change because look, Iowa was
7:49
Speaker 1: a swing state because of how much organization was created
7:55
Speaker 1: there and spent and built. Okay, there is only one
8:00
Speaker 1: first state because the first date, unlike every other state
8:04
Speaker 1: on the primary calendar for president the first date gets
8:07
Speaker 1: every candidate gets, every donor gets, every national reporter gets,
8:12
Speaker 1: every activist gets, every endorsement, battle gets every volunteer. They
8:16
Speaker 1: get it all first, and they always get it all.
8:20
Speaker 1: As candidates don't make it out of the first state,
8:23
Speaker 1: those organizations don't survive in a new Hampshire, in a Nevada,
8:28
Speaker 1: in a New Mexico, in a Michigan, in all right,
8:31
Speaker 1: in a Virginia, the rest of this calendar here, whoever's
8:36
Speaker 1: too on the calendar, you get. Whoever survives, You get
8:40
Speaker 1: to help explain momentum. There's some fundraising, there's media narratives,
8:44
Speaker 1: but the first date creates the reality of the presidential race,
8:48
Speaker 1: and every other state and every other state's voters is
8:52
Speaker 1: a reaction to it, and every other state gets a
8:54
Speaker 1: drive by the campaign. Only the first date is nurtured.
8:59
Speaker 1: Only the first date gets candidates who will do you know,
9:03
Speaker 1: long bus trips and you know, look, New Hampshire, being
9:05
Speaker 1: at co first state also experienced this. You get. You
9:10
Speaker 1: get perhaps tens or even, in the case of John
9:14
Speaker 1: McCain over the years, hundreds of town halls in a
9:16
Speaker 1: New Hampshire. You get candidates visiting all ninety nine counties
9:20
Speaker 1: in Iowa. So the point is, that's why first matters
9:25
Speaker 1: more than anything else. So South Carolina, let's dig into it.
9:31
Speaker 1: South Carolina isn't just replacing Iowa. It is replacing the
9:34
Speaker 1: function that Iowa had, because yes, South Carolina was in
9:40
Speaker 1: the early window, but it wasn't really an early state.
9:42
Speaker 1: It was kind of a decider state. Right. It helped
9:45
Speaker 1: essentially send the message to Super Tuesday, who was the
9:48
Speaker 1: most viable candidate in the South. And this has worked
9:50
Speaker 1: on the Republican side and the Democratic side, and usually
9:53
Speaker 1: the winter South Carolina went on to win the whole thing.
9:57
Speaker 1: By the times campaigns reached South Carolina previous late there
10:01
Speaker 1: were maybe two candidates left, sometimes three if you counted
10:04
Speaker 1: John Edwards back in Oa. Right, and South Carolina turned
10:07
Speaker 1: into an electability test among Democrats turned into a test
10:11
Speaker 1: of black voter support among Democrats. It was an establishment
10:15
Speaker 1: consolidation state see Jim Clyburn with Joe Biden rights. And
10:20
Speaker 1: again it usually served as a as a preview of
10:24
Speaker 1: what was to come on Super Tuesday. Well, so now
10:27
Speaker 1: South Carolina becomes the introduction, right, it's not the conclusion anymore.
10:32
Speaker 1: And this does change everything. And before I get into
10:35
Speaker 1: more of the details of this calendar, I'm not saying
10:39
Speaker 1: that DNC's motivation was the following that I'm about to say.
10:42
Speaker 1: But if I were to create a calendar that was
10:44
Speaker 1: going to do two things, make it much harder for
10:46
Speaker 1: a progressive to get the nominee and much harder for
10:49
Speaker 1: progressives to say the calendar was designed to stop a
10:51
Speaker 1: progressive from getting the nomination. This is the calendar I
10:54
Speaker 1: would come up with. And by the way, at the
10:56
Speaker 1: end of my at the end of this, I'm going
10:58
Speaker 1: to coming up, I'm going to give you a pro
11:01
Speaker 1: progressive nominee calendar would look like if this party wanted
11:05
Speaker 1: to see a progressive win. But this calendar is design
11:08
Speaker 1: and that's the Virginia closer there, right, Virginia now becomes
11:15
Speaker 1: the last stand for the establishment to stop a progressive
11:18
Speaker 1: if indeed a progressive has the momentum. But let's start
11:21
Speaker 1: with South Carolina becoming the introduction and why this is
11:26
Speaker 1: going to be an interesting experiment. I believe being first
11:31
Speaker 1: has allowed the state of Iowa for years and the
11:34
Speaker 1: state of New Hampshire to have very robust state party organizations.
11:39
Speaker 1: Right when every four years you have all of this
11:41
Speaker 1: influx of outside organizations starting things up, building all of
11:46
Speaker 1: these various organizations in ninety nine counties, trying to get
11:51
Speaker 1: caucus captains in New Hampshire or excy mean in Iowa,
11:54
Speaker 1: trying to get people to host town halls in New Hampshire,
11:57
Speaker 1: what you leave behind when you leave this state is
12:00
Speaker 1: there's a whole bunch of new activists, right, and this
12:03
Speaker 1: is this is what makes going first, We're gonna have
12:07
Speaker 1: a grand experiment. I've always believed there were two states
12:10
Speaker 1: in the South that the Democrats had sort of underinvested in.
12:13
Speaker 1: One is Mississippi, and I've talked about it a lot
12:15
Speaker 1: in this podcast. In the other South Carolina, where if
12:18
Speaker 1: they organized, essentially their side of the aisle better, had
12:22
Speaker 1: a little bit better voter registration, had better rural black outreach. Right.
12:28
Speaker 1: The Democrats problems in the rural black South is what's
12:33
Speaker 1: cost them North Carolina multiple times in the last decade.
12:36
Speaker 1: It is why they can't make South Carolina competitive and
12:39
Speaker 1: statewide elections, and frankly, it's why Georgia has ended up
12:42
Speaker 1: as close as it has. But there is opportunity in
12:46
Speaker 1: the so called black belt, right, the rural African American
12:51
Speaker 1: South that South Carolina and Mississippi more so than any
12:55
Speaker 1: other two states. There's just a big chunk of voters
12:58
Speaker 1: who have just never been engaged. Some of them got
13:01
Speaker 1: Obama Owait engaged them, which is why carried North Carolina right.
13:04
Speaker 1: The only Democrat to carry North Carolina in this century,
13:09
Speaker 1: and that was the one cycle that it worked in
13:10
Speaker 1: you saw. So now you're going to have in North
13:15
Speaker 1: in South Carolina somewhere between ten and fifteen campaigns running
13:19
Speaker 1: around the state over the next nine months. This is
13:21
Speaker 1: going to start almost immediately. You're going to start to
13:25
Speaker 1: see all of a sudden, and Andrews, the Democratic Senate nominee,
13:28
Speaker 1: is going to get more national Democrats calling her campaign, abay,
13:31
Speaker 1: you want me to hold a fundraiser for you? Can
13:33
Speaker 1: I help this? Can I help that you're a Democrat
13:35
Speaker 1: running in that The Democratic nominee in the first congressional
13:38
Speaker 1: district in Charleston is going to see, you know, and
13:41
Speaker 1: you know, depending on how these Democrats want to portray themselves,
13:44
Speaker 1: they'll probably say yes to the Josh Shapiros of the world.
13:48
Speaker 1: I don't know if they're gonna want the Bernie Sanders's
13:50
Speaker 1: of the world to come, but we're going to That's
13:52
Speaker 1: going to be interesting to interesting to see, but you're
13:54
Speaker 1: going to see it. And that's what you know because
13:59
Speaker 1: the being I mean, look at the competitiveness of Iowa
14:02
Speaker 1: basically until the last five years, right, I think it
14:07
Speaker 1: has been driven by being an early state. I think
14:09
Speaker 1: it has been driven by every four or eight years.
14:12
Speaker 1: And by the way, both parties have benefited from this
14:14
Speaker 1: over time, depending because they both have had numerous campaigns
14:18
Speaker 1: just pour millions and millions of dollars. And so for instance,
14:22
Speaker 1: for years both the state parties in Iowa, the state
14:25
Speaker 1: Dems and state GOP both punched above their weight, way
14:29
Speaker 1: above their weight. And that's because of all the presidential
14:32
Speaker 1: resources that come in. Now we are going to see
14:34
Speaker 1: the first experiment Democrats have an investment in South Carolina
14:37
Speaker 1: like this. Ever, not since, not in the modern Democratic Party,
14:42
Speaker 1: not since it was the Dixiocrats. Okay, has there been
14:46
Speaker 1: a Democratic investment in the state of South Carolina. So
14:49
Speaker 1: not really with the with with this modern era. So
14:52
Speaker 1: now you're going to have probably for the next couple
14:55
Speaker 1: of cycles. Right, You're going to see every county organized.
14:59
Speaker 1: You're gonna see volunteer coordinators, You're going to see county chairs,
15:02
Speaker 1: You're going to see voter registration drives. There's going to
15:04
Speaker 1: be all sorts of new organizations created. You know, right
15:09
Speaker 1: now you got the Jim Cliburn fish fry. I promise
15:11
Speaker 1: you there's going to be a slew of other Democrats
15:14
Speaker 1: kind of come up with annual events like we saw
15:16
Speaker 1: develop over the years in Iowa and New Hampshire. But
15:22
Speaker 1: what this stuff does is it organizes within that state.
15:26
Speaker 1: You know the history of Genie Shaheen in politics. She's
15:29
Speaker 1: now the retiring senator from New Hampshire. She got her
15:31
Speaker 1: start organizing for Gary Hart in nineteen eighty four New Hampshire.
15:34
Speaker 1: Well what did that do, right, these organizations, these outside
15:38
Speaker 1: organizations hiring locals doing well. Well, all of a sudden,
15:42
Speaker 1: she became a future candidate for office. She became a
15:46
Speaker 1: future multi term governor and multi term senator. By the way,
15:52
Speaker 1: New Hampshire arguably was not necessarily a battleground state until
15:57
Speaker 1: years and years and years of this sort of organizing
16:01
Speaker 1: of the state. Right, and this is this is the center.
16:06
Speaker 1: Look at Iowa, right, the Iowa Caucus has become very
16:09
Speaker 1: mainstream starting in seventy six and eighty and by eighty four,
16:13
Speaker 1: that's when Tom Harkin wins, Grassley wins in eighty and
16:17
Speaker 1: there's one D and one R senator in Iowa for
16:19
Speaker 1: the next thirty years basically, and that's all thanks to
16:24
Speaker 1: the Iowa caucuses. Right, Grassley statewide machine, in part helped
16:30
Speaker 1: built by the Republicans nationally coming in for the Iowa caucuses.
16:35
Speaker 1: Tom Harkin statewide network enhanced and funded thanks to the
16:41
Speaker 1: Democratic candidates coming into Iowa. So look, I'm not saying
16:45
Speaker 1: correlation isn't causation here, but after watching this for forty years,
16:50
Speaker 1: it is hard for me to ignore the importance of
16:52
Speaker 1: this early state investment. Having so many people from all
16:56
Speaker 1: over the country spend so much time, so much money
16:59
Speaker 1: thrown in, it has a benefit. So we're going to
17:02
Speaker 1: this is the great experiment that I'm looking forward to
17:05
Speaker 1: because I've always maintained, with a little more TLC the
17:08
Speaker 1: Democrat that South Carolina should be a swing state. There
17:12
Speaker 1: is enough, the population there is more evenly divided than
17:18
Speaker 1: the politics would indicate, and it's just been an under
17:21
Speaker 1: investment by the Democratic Party. And now you're going to
17:25
Speaker 1: see what this is going to turn. So that's what's
17:27
Speaker 1: going to fascinate. We're going to find out for sure
17:30
Speaker 1: if my theory of the case here, particularly being a
17:33
Speaker 1: first day right being the because it's different all the others. Yes,
17:38
Speaker 1: they'll will be candidates will come early, you know, but
17:41
Speaker 1: they'll parachute in they'll do a day or two and
17:45
Speaker 1: then they'll go back to South Carolina because lack Iowa,
17:48
Speaker 1: South Carolina will have three, maybe four tickets out of it,
17:50
Speaker 1: depending on the number of candidates. Maybe everybody over double
17:53
Speaker 1: digits will be seen as viable coming out of South Carolina,
17:56
Speaker 1: and anybody in single digits kind of unviable. You know,
17:59
Speaker 1: they'll be well, we'll see how many. You know, it'll depend.
18:03
Speaker 1: But watching ten to twelve serious presidential campaign spending an
18:07
Speaker 1: entire year organizing South Carolina, those hundreds of organizers, those
18:11
Speaker 1: thousands of volunteers, those millions spent on voter contact, church outreach,
18:16
Speaker 1: college campuses, military communities, rural black turnout. So we'll know
18:24
Speaker 1: in twenty thirty if Democrats on the statewide level are
18:27
Speaker 1: much more competitive. If they are, I think that will
18:33
Speaker 1: tell you something. This episode of the Check podcast is
18:42
Speaker 1: brought to you by fand OL Baseball Fans. Think you
18:45
Speaker 1: know who's hitting a homer today, Well, Fandel is giving
18:47
Speaker 1: you a free chance to call your shot with Daily Danners.
18:51
Speaker 1: Joining the action is easy. You just make your free
18:53
Speaker 1: pick on who's hitting a home run in their game,
18:56
Speaker 1: and if you're right, you'll get a profit. Boost to
18:57
Speaker 1: use on your next bet for a chance at extra winnings.
19:01
Speaker 1: You've got nothing to lose and you get a lot
19:03
Speaker 1: to gain, And don't forget you can make a free
19:05
Speaker 1: pick every day during the MLB season. It's just another
19:09
Speaker 1: reason why fandel is the home for home runs. So
19:12
Speaker 1: are you ready to play your game today? Join all
19:15
Speaker 1: the action at FanDuel dot com. That's fandle dot com
19:18
Speaker 1: to play daily dingers and make your free pick on
19:21
Speaker 1: who's hitting a homer. Playball and swing for the fences
19:24
Speaker 1: on fandle, an official partner of the MLB. Twenty one
19:28
Speaker 1: plus in select states. For Kansas and affiliation with the
19:31
Speaker 1: Kansas Star Casino, it's eighteen plus in DC, Kentucky, Wyoming.
19:35
Speaker 1: If you have a gambling problem, call one eight hundred
19:38
Speaker 1: Gambler or one eight hundred MI Reset or call one
19:42
Speaker 1: eight eight eight seven eight nine seven seven seven seven.
19:46
Speaker 1: You can also visit CCPG dot org slash chat. In Connecticut,
19:51
Speaker 1: you can visit the MD Gamblinghelp dot org. In Maryland
19:55
Speaker 1: for help, you can visit Gamblinghelplinema dot org. You can
19:59
Speaker 1: call eight hundred three to two seven five zero five zero.
20:02
Speaker 1: In Massachusetts, you can call one eight seven seven eight
20:06
Speaker 1: Hope and Why, or you can simply text hope and
20:10
Speaker 1: why New York in order to get some help with
20:14
Speaker 1: any gambling concerns. Finally, you can also call one eight
20:17
Speaker 1: seven seven seven seven zero seven eight six seven if
20:20
Speaker 1: you're in Louisiana. I'll give you this prediction. The Democratic
20:28
Speaker 1: nomine in twenty twenty eight may not matter as much
20:30
Speaker 1: as what all those campaigns leave on all right. By
20:35
Speaker 1: the way, one thing is worth noting here. South Carolina's
20:38
Speaker 1: presidential primary isn't primarily financed by the Democratic Party. This
20:41
Speaker 1: is a weird system they have. The state Election Commission
20:43
Speaker 1: conducts it. Taxpayers bear most of the costs. Parties do
20:47
Speaker 1: pay exorbitant candidate filing fees to try to try to
20:51
Speaker 1: essentially cut back how much taxpayer money is used. So
20:57
Speaker 1: this one, it's sort of this quad that's always been,
20:59
Speaker 1: this quasi partnership. Both Republicans and Democrats get this help
21:02
Speaker 1: from the state. But it's just help, right because the
21:05
Speaker 1: state organizations themselves, you don't necessarily want them running these
21:09
Speaker 1: firehouse primaries. So I do think a huge deal that's
21:16
Speaker 1: South Carolina. Now for my other part of this calendar thesis,
21:19
Speaker 1: it's this calendar designed to favor moderates. So look, to me,
21:25
Speaker 1: this is what this calendar looks like. This looks like
21:27
Speaker 1: an attempt to so, for instance, by starting in South Carolina,
21:31
Speaker 1: you already are saying this has been where progressives where
21:36
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders twice, it's just gotten thumped by the time
21:40
Speaker 1: you go through right. South Carolina has not been very
21:43
Speaker 1: open to these progressive, socialist adjacent white campaigns. It has
21:49
Speaker 1: not gone well. So the fact that the party wants
21:51
Speaker 1: to start here right again, if I were a progressive
21:54
Speaker 1: conspiracy theorist, be like now, the argument I'd make to
21:57
Speaker 1: progressives to say, oh, no, no, no, this is different this
21:59
Speaker 1: time is that there might be multiple candidates trying to
22:03
Speaker 1: win over the more moderate vote it splinters, and a
22:06
Speaker 1: progressive consolidating the progressive support in the state. Well, guess what.
22:11
Speaker 1: Twenty percent is a terrible number in a two way race.
22:14
Speaker 1: Twenty percent might be a great number at a six
22:16
Speaker 1: way race. But still, the more I study this map,
22:21
Speaker 1: the more I think, whether intentionally or simply by consequence,
22:26
Speaker 1: though I don't think there's any accidents in presidential politics,
22:29
Speaker 1: this calendar is intended to make life harder for an
22:32
Speaker 1: insurgent progressive. That's its intent. Right. The sequence itself is
22:39
Speaker 1: the story, right, opening with South Carolina and closing with Virginia,
22:43
Speaker 1: a state that is not that has been very friendly
22:47
Speaker 1: to Democrats but not very friendly to progressive democrats. Right,
22:52
Speaker 1: But the sequence here does tell you something. South Carolina, Nevada,
22:55
Speaker 1: New Hampshire, New Mexico, Michigan, Virginia not a not a
22:59
Speaker 1: place that's home to many super progressive electorates. Right, there
23:03
Speaker 1: was a Wisconsin on here, progressives would be happier. Shoot,
23:06
Speaker 1: if Iowa were here, progressives would be happier. But that
23:10
Speaker 1: is not the case. So I would say, if I
23:13
Speaker 1: were trying to maximize the odds of nominating a broadly
23:16
Speaker 1: more so called acceptable center left democrat, I might build
23:23
Speaker 1: a calendar that looks something like this. Right, just look
23:26
Speaker 1: at Bernie Sanders's to South Carolina performances twenty six percent
23:29
Speaker 1: and sixteen twenty percent twenty and historically we've seen South
23:34
Speaker 1: Carolina has been a huge ceiling for white progressives. But
23:37
Speaker 1: this is where I would tell progresses, Okay, here's your
23:40
Speaker 1: potential left side. Because sometimes these calendars, no matter what
23:44
Speaker 1: a national party wants to do, they don't always follow
23:47
Speaker 1: the designers blueprint. Trust me. The primary calendars in the
23:51
Speaker 1: eighties were all designed to nominate Southern governors. Well, guess what.
23:54
Speaker 1: The Democrats did nominate a Southern governor until nineteen ninety two.
23:58
Speaker 1: Right in eighty four they got the the northern Liberal
24:01
Speaker 1: in Walter Mondale, and in eighty eight they got the
24:03
Speaker 1: Northeastern Liberal and Michael Ducakas. Again, the intent of the
24:08
Speaker 1: calendar and of Super Tuesday was to try to let
24:11
Speaker 1: the South decide, but Jesse Jackson's candidacy sign of disrupted
24:16
Speaker 1: their plans there. So the point is you can design
24:19
Speaker 1: where you think this calendar is going to go, and
24:24
Speaker 1: it may not produce the results you're hoping for. Trust Me,
24:26
Speaker 1: all those southern governors in the eighties thought that the
24:29
Speaker 1: calendar they helped push the DNC to implement back back
24:33
Speaker 1: then was supposed to get a Southern whether it's Al
24:37
Speaker 1: Goren eighty eight, Chuck, Rob Sam Nunn, it was designed
24:41
Speaker 1: to nominate a Southern Democrat, and they didn't get there
24:43
Speaker 1: until ninety two. So that caveat of side. I'm going
24:48
Speaker 1: to give you an example of why South Carolina could
24:50
Speaker 1: end up being a great state for a progressive insurgent candidate,
24:57
Speaker 1: and it's let me tell you the story of John McCain.
25:00
Speaker 1: John McCain in two thousand loses South Carolina with roughly
25:03
Speaker 1: forty two percent of the vote. Again, in a one
25:05
Speaker 1: on one race with George W. Bush in two thousand
25:09
Speaker 1: and eight, John McCain does worse in South Carolina. He
25:14
Speaker 1: gets thirty three percent, but because there were five viable
25:19
Speaker 1: campaigns still actively campaigning in South Carolina, thirty three percent
25:24
Speaker 1: became a winning number, much more crowded field. And then
25:27
Speaker 1: it handed McCain though the narrative and the sort of
25:31
Speaker 1: the narrative momentum he needed to convince donors. This race
25:36
Speaker 1: was basically over. Hey, he did what he couldn't do
25:38
Speaker 1: the last time he won South Carolina. So take a
25:41
Speaker 1: Bernie Sanders, or take AOC if you want to put
25:45
Speaker 1: her in the Bernie Sanders space, or Roe Comma. Okay,
25:48
Speaker 1: and the progressive candidate gets so Bernie got twenty one,
25:51
Speaker 1: twenty sixty. Other time, let's let's put the number at twenty.
25:54
Speaker 1: Let's take his low number. This his first twenty percent.
26:00
Speaker 1: Twenty percent could be good enough for second place. Right,
26:02
Speaker 1: you know, we don't know how many are in I'm
26:04
Speaker 1: going to get to the Kamala Harris wes Moore, all
26:06
Speaker 1: this stuff, right, But twenty five percent in a with
26:11
Speaker 1: six candidates getting double digits not totally out of the question.
26:16
Speaker 1: Certainly four will be in double digits, but maybe more
26:20
Speaker 1: then that can be a winning number. This is what
26:24
Speaker 1: worked for John McCain in sort of him to sort
26:27
Speaker 1: of quiet the conservative wing of the party who was
26:31
Speaker 1: who is not a big fan of his. So that
26:35
Speaker 1: would be my case to Progress is saying, hey, yes,
26:39
Speaker 1: it's not this is not the most favorable terrain. But
26:43
Speaker 1: suddenly if the you know, take the take the black vote,
26:45
Speaker 1: if you have Kamala, Harris wes Moore and Raphael Warnock,
26:48
Speaker 1: I'll run it. That's not an unreasonable field to see
26:52
Speaker 1: throwing a Joshapiro, JB. Pritzker, all of whom will be
26:55
Speaker 1: working hard to court the African American vote. I'm not
26:58
Speaker 1: saying Pete bootagits that, and I'm gonna say the progressive
27:01
Speaker 1: candidate's not gonna be out there doing that either. But
27:04
Speaker 1: if the perception that the more moderate Canada there's more
27:06
Speaker 1: of them in there, well, I don't think you're going
27:08
Speaker 1: to see the consolidation right because, trust me, Jim Cliburn,
27:11
Speaker 1: who could consolidate the Black vote within a big endorsement,
27:15
Speaker 1: he wants more money being spent. He's gonna he's gonna
27:19
Speaker 1: if he endorses at all, he's gonna wait till the
27:22
Speaker 1: very last minute because he's going to make sure his
27:24
Speaker 1: endorsement is decisive. Right. If his endorsement, if he doesn't
27:26
Speaker 1: think it can be decisive, he's not gonna do it.
27:30
Speaker 1: So the possibility that you have a splintered field like that, look,
27:36
Speaker 1: this is what has what benefited you know other Like
27:40
Speaker 1: I said, the McCain example is probably the strongest example
27:43
Speaker 1: of that, where he got a lower percentage, but it
27:45
Speaker 1: was a winning number because the field was more crowded.
27:48
Speaker 1: That is what I would hang my hat on if
27:53
Speaker 1: I were a progressive. Uh and before I take a
27:56
Speaker 1: tour of the rest of the calendar very quickly, so
28:01
Speaker 1: I saw there's been some developing conventional wisdom that this
28:04
Speaker 1: calendar is good news for Kamala Aero's. I get why
28:07
Speaker 1: in theory because look, being the highest name ID, she's
28:09
Speaker 1: going to pull well in the immediate but this is
28:13
Speaker 1: actually a disaster for her. Because it puts expectations right
28:17
Speaker 1: at the top. She has to start as the front runner. Basically,
28:19
Speaker 1: if she doesn't win South Carolina, she's out right. It
28:22
Speaker 1: becomes you can say that's not fair, but if you're
28:26
Speaker 1: going to start as the front runner, you can't lose, right.
28:28
Speaker 2: It was.
28:29
Speaker 1: It was the tyranny of it is what made Hillary
28:32
Speaker 1: Clinton's candidacy in hindsight in two thousand and eight so difficult.
28:35
Speaker 1: To her expectations, management and all that stuff. She starts
28:38
Speaker 1: as the big front runner. As Obama closes the gap,
28:41
Speaker 1: it looks like she's getting weaker, when really it was
28:43
Speaker 1: just sort of his name id and and it was
28:46
Speaker 1: sort of an even race, but it wasn't an even race,
28:49
Speaker 1: right Like, once he caught her, it felt like she
28:51
Speaker 1: was losing steam. He was gaining steam. And then that's
28:54
Speaker 1: the problem for her. If you're to ask me, this
28:57
Speaker 1: calendar on paper is best for wesmore right. This is
29:04
Speaker 1: African American governor military vetter. Hello, South Carolina, home of
29:11
Speaker 1: quite a few African American big African American electorate, particularly
29:14
Speaker 1: in the Democratic primary, and a huge chunk of independence.
29:17
Speaker 1: And by the way, it's a non registration state, meaning
29:20
Speaker 1: everybody can come in just like Iowa. That's what makes
29:23
Speaker 1: it interesting. You're going to learn who is going to
29:25
Speaker 1: have more success getting independence to participate into this primary
29:29
Speaker 1: and all this stuff. So look, I think if you're
29:31
Speaker 1: just looking at all of the candidates before they this
29:34
Speaker 1: thing is this is the best news for Warnock and Moore.
29:39
Speaker 1: And I think in a weird way, it's not good
29:42
Speaker 1: for Harris simply because she has to start first while
29:46
Speaker 1: everybody is going to be trying to chip away, and
29:49
Speaker 1: she's constantly going to have to be defending that, And
29:51
Speaker 1: so I'm not as I think in some ways she
29:55
Speaker 1: would have been better off starting in a state that
29:58
Speaker 1: would have been perceived to be a weak state for her.
30:00
Speaker 1: Then it gave her a way to quote overperform and
30:03
Speaker 1: prove some of the donor detractors wrong on this. This
30:07
Speaker 1: is in some ways the exact wrong place. So again,
30:10
Speaker 1: I know I've seen some sort of developing conventional wisdom,
30:13
Speaker 1: and I get it right early polling is going to indicate.
30:16
Speaker 1: But you know, essentially, never pay any attention whoever's in
30:19
Speaker 1: first place this far out in presidential it's just a
30:24
Speaker 1: measurement of name might be almost more than anything else,
30:26
Speaker 1: and that's why I would be careful. All right, let's
30:28
Speaker 1: take let me run through the rest of the calendar.
30:30
Speaker 1: Here tuck about New Hampshire. The New Hampshire State Party
30:33
Speaker 1: was throwing a hissy fit. Boy. I look, I've known
30:37
Speaker 1: right Buckley a long time. I get that New Hampshire
30:40
Speaker 1: it's in their DNA to have to If they're not first,
30:42
Speaker 1: then they're going to write and moan. But here's the thing.
30:46
Speaker 1: They have no constituency outside of New Hampshire. One two.
30:50
Speaker 1: This has turned out not to be a voting issue, right,
30:52
Speaker 1: Democrats basically taunting them doing that whole right end, you know,
30:58
Speaker 1: with Dean Phillips and all that stuff, that didn't arm
31:00
Speaker 1: the Democrats democratic candidates in the state. Right, it is
31:03
Speaker 1: not a voting issue for voters. So they've not been
31:07
Speaker 1: able to successfully sort of galop, you know, make Democrats
31:10
Speaker 1: pay a price for doing this, because obviously if they did,
31:14
Speaker 1: they'd be cutting off their noses, bite their face, right,
31:16
Speaker 1: they'd be handing races to Republicans there. So New Hampshire
31:20
Speaker 1: ought to be thankful they were included. But look that
31:25
Speaker 1: this ship has sailed, and I think if they try
31:28
Speaker 1: to go ahead and do it. Bill Gardner, the former
31:33
Speaker 1: Secretary State, used to do all the time, and just
31:35
Speaker 1: whatever the parties decide, leap frog it and sort of
31:37
Speaker 1: dare the candidates to go. I don't think the candidates
31:40
Speaker 1: feel like they own New Hampshire anything. I don't think
31:43
Speaker 1: there's this you know. I think there's Look, the legacy
31:47
Speaker 1: media has gone away. I don't think there's this natural tendency,
31:50
Speaker 1: you know, and if media were built the old way.
31:52
Speaker 1: So I just think if they try to make this
31:55
Speaker 1: a fight, they can, but they're only going to marginalize
31:58
Speaker 1: their place even more. So. The bottom line is, I'm
32:02
Speaker 1: not convinced New Hampshire has as much leverage as New
32:04
Speaker 1: Hampshire thinks it has. And the more they do it,
32:07
Speaker 1: the fewer candidates they're going to see. Nevada. This is
32:11
Speaker 1: my am. I say this. One of my favorite professional
32:14
Speaker 1: relationships in journalism is with John Ralston, the founder of
32:19
Speaker 1: one of the most important local news organizations out on
32:22
Speaker 1: the West, the Nevada Independent. This guy is you want
32:27
Speaker 1: to understand Nevada politics, John Ralston is the first, second, third,
32:32
Speaker 1: and fourth places to go to find out what the
32:35
Speaker 1: heck is going on. So this is by no means
32:39
Speaker 1: a critique of John Ralston. But Nevada is a terrible
32:45
Speaker 1: early primary state. If the intent is to build is
32:49
Speaker 1: to party build, Nevada is a great early primary state
32:53
Speaker 1: if this is about appeasing a special interest group. And
32:57
Speaker 1: that's the bottom line, because Nevada is not the that
33:00
Speaker 1: Democrats are claiming it is right. I'm not saying the
33:06
Speaker 1: culinary Union decides everything because they technically didn't endorse in
33:10
Speaker 1: twenty twenty, but the entire campaign that everybody runs in
33:16
Speaker 1: Nevada is organized around the possibility of not alienating the
33:20
Speaker 1: culinary Union and hoping to earn the culinary union support,
33:24
Speaker 1: so it shapes the entire state. This is not a
33:27
Speaker 1: way to build an organization. This is not a way.
33:31
Speaker 1: This is this is throwing a bone to labor. Right
33:38
Speaker 1: the South Carolina is a week labor state. Frankly, Virginia
33:41
Speaker 1: is a week labor state. You know, Nevada is a
33:43
Speaker 1: strong labor state. So this is about throwing a bone
33:46
Speaker 1: to labor because Iowa was a strong labor state and
33:50
Speaker 1: since they're not going to have this is why there
33:52
Speaker 1: was such a push for Nevada to be first over
33:54
Speaker 1: South Carolina. But Nevada had a couple of problems. Even
33:59
Speaker 1: though they changed from a caucus to a primary, they
34:01
Speaker 1: couldn't guarantee in the all mail in ballot or mostly
34:04
Speaker 1: mail in ballot structure that Nevada has, that you'd get
34:07
Speaker 1: results in the same night. And it's interesting to me
34:10
Speaker 1: that the DNC prioritize states that could deliver results on
34:16
Speaker 1: the same night, right, given the mess in Iowa. Look,
34:19
Speaker 1: Iowa was not in this window simply because they couldn't
34:21
Speaker 1: run the caucuses correctly and couldn't produce They couldn't produce
34:29
Speaker 1: a result that wasn't questioned. Right, They ended up producing
34:31
Speaker 1: a result, but they couldn't produce one question. And part
34:34
Speaker 1: of it goes back to twenty sixteen, where there was
34:36
Speaker 1: clear there was clear examples of the state party trying
34:43
Speaker 1: to marginalize Sanders's support, which blew up in their face.
34:48
Speaker 1: And frankly, you know it was this is where the
34:51
Speaker 1: IOA Democratic Party did themselves in by trying to essentially
34:56
Speaker 1: help the Clinton campaign back in sixteen, which as a
35:01
Speaker 1: you know, did she do more for the party than
35:02
Speaker 1: Bernie Sure? So I understand that you could say if
35:05
Speaker 1: you if you're going to play favorite, you play favorites
35:07
Speaker 1: with the one that's a Democrat, not the one that's
35:09
Speaker 1: not interested in the party. But they but that's the thing.
35:12
Speaker 1: They played unfair and they got caught and it just
35:16
Speaker 1: sort of blew up the process from the get go.
35:20
Speaker 1: But the only reason Nevada lost this bout is because
35:22
Speaker 1: they couldn't figure out how to how to promise results
35:25
Speaker 1: on the same night. I'll let everybody else still in
35:28
Speaker 1: the blank and on the irony of the d n
35:30
Speaker 1: C sharing the same the same hopes and dreams of
35:37
Speaker 1: election nights that Donald Trump has, where everything needs to
35:39
Speaker 1: be counted on the same night, and a president in
35:41
Speaker 1: the in the world of presidential politics, this is suddenly
35:44
Speaker 1: a priority of the d n C. But this is
35:46
Speaker 1: the wrong place in the West to test Latino vote
35:48
Speaker 1: because again, it is all wrapped up. And so I
35:52
Speaker 1: think I think the Bata is a terrible state to
35:54
Speaker 1: be using out West. If the whole intent is to
35:58
Speaker 1: help your future nominee learn how to campaign to win
36:03
Speaker 1: over Hispanic votes better, Arizona would be a much better
36:06
Speaker 1: place to go. It's a much more geographically diverse state.
36:10
Speaker 1: And me that's the other problem. It's like a one
36:11
Speaker 1: market state in Nevada. Yes, Reno is not a you know,
36:15
Speaker 1: not an unimportant market there, and yes you can argue
36:18
Speaker 1: Arizona's a big one market, but in some ways that
36:20
Speaker 1: market is so big it's five markets within a market.
36:22
Speaker 1: So I think that was a I think Nevada again,
36:27
Speaker 1: I get I know why they're there. They're there because
36:29
Speaker 1: of their insider influence. Nevada is not doing anything to
36:33
Speaker 1: help the Democratic Party be better about wooing Latino voters
36:37
Speaker 1: or Western voters or getting them smarter. So I think
36:40
Speaker 1: Nevada complete waste of time here, sorry John Ralston, but
36:45
Speaker 1: it does not test what it should test. And by
36:47
Speaker 1: the way their last I mean, it's just in some
36:50
Speaker 1: ways too dominated by a sort of a one special
36:55
Speaker 1: interest group. Not necessarily. Now, Michigan, in theory, Michigan is
36:58
Speaker 1: a great state. But oh my god, are we going
37:03
Speaker 1: to have the week before the Michigan primary nothing but
37:06
Speaker 1: this horrible divisive debate about Israel. Oh yes we will
37:12
Speaker 1: now right, Michigan being in the early window, Look, was
37:15
Speaker 1: this issue going to be potentially let us test issue
37:17
Speaker 1: for plenty of voters anyway, maybe, but now you have
37:21
Speaker 1: put it in the calendar. There was a huge unforced
37:24
Speaker 1: error by the National Party, and I get it right,
37:29
Speaker 1: Michigan in some ways, there's a lot of other good
37:31
Speaker 1: things going for it, geographically diverse, electorate, diverse, different factions
37:37
Speaker 1: even within the Democratic Party right, but of all cycles
37:41
Speaker 1: to throw Israel, which is really dividing, particularly in the
37:45
Speaker 1: donor community, activist community, you name it. I wonder if
37:51
Speaker 1: this becomes so divisive that it hurts the party in
37:53
Speaker 1: a general election, whether they will regret putting Michigan in
37:58
Speaker 1: this early one dow. This episode of the Chuck Podcast
38:06
Speaker 1: is brought to you by Ethos and what Ethos does
38:08
Speaker 1: is it helps you find life insurance. Let me tell
38:10
Speaker 1: you why life insurance bailed me out. My father died
38:13
Speaker 1: when I was sixteen. We didn't have a lot of
38:15
Speaker 1: money when it happened, and we were in a pretty
38:17
Speaker 1: tough financial spot after it happened. I'm an only child.
38:22
Speaker 1: Suddenly my mother's single, single mother. She had a job,
38:25
Speaker 1: suddenly lost a job, looking for another job, and we
38:27
Speaker 1: were struggling. You know, my dad didn't leave us in
38:30
Speaker 1: the best financial situation, but he did make one purchase.
38:33
Speaker 1: He bought a life insurance policy. Wasn't a huge chunk
38:36
Speaker 1: of change. But it was enough when we found it.
38:39
Speaker 1: And when I say we found it, meaning we went
38:41
Speaker 1: through his desk and we found, oh, look at this,
38:42
Speaker 1: let's see if there's anything here. And it helped us
38:45
Speaker 1: out at a time that we really needed it. And
38:47
Speaker 1: that's why I think it's important that if you can,
38:51
Speaker 1: especially if you have young children, if you can get
38:53
Speaker 1: life insurance, you should get it. Life is full of
38:56
Speaker 1: unexpected emergencies, unexpected things happen. It is an extra bit
39:00
Speaker 1: of security, something you can leave and help out at
39:04
Speaker 1: a time when you're you're not there to help. So
39:07
Speaker 1: what does Ethos do well? Ethos makes getting life insurance
39:10
Speaker 1: fast and easy and it's one hundred percent online. You
39:13
Speaker 1: can get a quote in seconds, you can apply in minutes,
39:15
Speaker 1: and you can get same day coverage. They will find
39:17
Speaker 1: you the right fit. There's no medical exam. You just
39:20
Speaker 1: answer a few simple health questions online. You can get
39:22
Speaker 1: up to three million dollars in coverage and some policies
39:25
Speaker 1: are as low as thirty dollars a month, and you'll
39:27
Speaker 1: get your lowest rate from their network of trusted carriers.
39:31
Speaker 1: So take ten minutes to get covered today with Life
39:33
Speaker 1: insurance through Ethos. Get your free quote at Ethos dot
39:37
Speaker 1: com slash chuck. That is, ETOs dot com slash chuck.
39:43
Speaker 1: Application times may vary and rates may vary. And then finally,
39:53
Speaker 1: let me get to Virginia. This is why if I
39:57
Speaker 1: was suspicious about creating a calendar to make it life
40:03
Speaker 1: as difficult as possible for progressives, it was the inclusion
40:07
Speaker 1: of Virginia here at the end that sort of cemented
40:13
Speaker 1: that belief. Right now, and it's a former DNC chair
40:16
Speaker 1: who happens to be also a former Democratic governor who
40:19
Speaker 1: was working really hard to champion Virginia in the window,
40:22
Speaker 1: but now Virginia, right, it's the Ricky Bobber rule. If
40:25
Speaker 1: you ain't first, your last. So all right, Virginia got first,
40:27
Speaker 1: but now Virginia's last. In the early window, Virginia is
40:30
Speaker 1: the last primary on an island before we get to
40:34
Speaker 1: Super Tuesday. Virginia will be the either last stand of
40:39
Speaker 1: the moderates to try to stop a progressive right. We
40:41
Speaker 1: saw it on the Republican side, remember Marco Rubio consolidated
40:45
Speaker 1: the moderate vote. It was the last chance to stop Trump. Right.
40:49
Speaker 1: They came close, but they didn't get there. But it
40:52
Speaker 1: served as that Virginia served as a place to essentially
40:58
Speaker 1: give Obama momentum back after losing in New Hampshire and
41:03
Speaker 1: he needed some Yes, he was winning South Carolina, but
41:06
Speaker 1: that kind of got written off, so he needed another
41:08
Speaker 1: proof point here, and then he just sort of swept those.
41:11
Speaker 1: If you recall the mid Atlantic was all together that day,
41:13
Speaker 1: I think it was Virginia, d C. And Marilyn went
41:15
Speaker 1: it all on the same day, and the timing of
41:17
Speaker 1: that was just sort of a huge momentum, a huge
41:22
Speaker 1: burst of momentum for Obama right before going into Super Tuesday.
41:27
Speaker 1: And I think now Virginia's put itself there. Remember this
41:30
Speaker 1: is a non registered party state. And we've seen you know,
41:32
Speaker 1: Ralph Northam one on one with a progressive It was
41:35
Speaker 1: Ralph Northam on sort of the moderate wing. You had
41:39
Speaker 1: Tom Perriello who was on the progressive side in that
41:43
Speaker 1: primary for governor, and you saw the results on there.
41:46
Speaker 1: North fum one quite handily. So it Virginia has been
41:51
Speaker 1: a bit allergic to sort of the progressive wing. It's
41:54
Speaker 1: a blue state, but it is not a progressive state. Yes,
41:57
Speaker 1: there are pockets of progressive support in parts of northern Virginia.
42:02
Speaker 1: You can find it in Arlington. Certainly, you can find
42:04
Speaker 1: it in parts of Alexandria, and certainly parts of Fairfax.
42:08
Speaker 1: But the state is much more of a sort of center.
42:12
Speaker 1: It is an Abigail Spanberger state, right. It is not
42:14
Speaker 1: Tom Perriello's state on that front. So the fact that
42:20
Speaker 1: this calendar closes with Virginia tells me that this is
42:25
Speaker 1: again the Democratic establishment here has put in a few
42:32
Speaker 1: sort of in case of emergencies as far as and
42:37
Speaker 1: this goes to their belief that the progressive socialist adjacent
42:41
Speaker 1: wing of the party can't win a general election. Now,
42:44
Speaker 1: a lot of this conventional wisdom could change depending on
42:47
Speaker 1: what we see in Michigan Senate the cycle, right, But
42:49
Speaker 1: right now, that's the conventional wisdom, and that, my friends,
42:54
Speaker 1: is how this calendar was built. It is. It is
42:59
Speaker 1: not a good calendar for aoc rocanna for the progressive wing.
43:04
Speaker 1: It is potentially a fantastic calendar if you're Wes Moore,
43:08
Speaker 1: I mean, think about it, right, Virginia neighboring state being
43:11
Speaker 1: last in the window South Carolina, I mean, I go
43:17
Speaker 1: if you believe in the Wes Moore candidacy, it is
43:23
Speaker 1: literally the perfect primary calendar for him. The table is
43:27
Speaker 1: set for him better than any other candidate, better path
43:33
Speaker 1: than Gavin, better path than Pritsker, better path than Shapiro.
43:37
Speaker 1: Maybe you know again, Raphaeld Warnock, neighboring state of Georgia
43:40
Speaker 1: going in South Carolina, that's good for him too. But
43:43
Speaker 1: I look at there, and I think that if if
43:47
Speaker 1: I looked at and said, who is the single biggest
43:51
Speaker 1: beneficiary of all of these folks, it is that, and
43:55
Speaker 1: to a lesser extent, Pete pudagesh Now I think the
43:58
Speaker 1: Biden baggage is going to be a little heavier for him.
44:01
Speaker 1: He still needs to have a proof point of winning
44:03
Speaker 1: over African American voters. That's been a huge challenge for him.
44:07
Speaker 1: But the same test that progressives get to pass in
44:11
Speaker 1: South Carolina due to splintered if the African American vote splinters,
44:16
Speaker 1: is actually a similar a similar test that Pete Buotages
44:21
Speaker 1: might be able to pass and suddenly make it seem
44:24
Speaker 1: as if, hey, look, he's doing better with black voters
44:28
Speaker 1: than we thought he could do. So, since I characterize
44:32
Speaker 1: this calendar as very much a calendar designed for the
44:36
Speaker 1: mainstream wing of the Democratic Party, I thought, well, we
44:39
Speaker 1: can build our own calendars here, and I'd love to
44:41
Speaker 1: hear back from you if you've got better ideas. So,
44:45
Speaker 1: because look, the calendar, this is my point here. The
44:49
Speaker 1: calendar here does have impact on the campaigns, has impact
44:54
Speaker 1: on which candidates. So let's build one if you want
44:56
Speaker 1: it to ensure a progressive UH, to give a progressive
45:01
Speaker 1: insurgent every chance they had ab nominee. What calendar would
45:05
Speaker 1: would I build? I'd start, believe it or not. With Iowa,
45:08
Speaker 1: We've seen it before. Progressives have always been able to
45:11
Speaker 1: right and and the socialist adjacent wing and the progressive
45:14
Speaker 1: wing are better canvassers, better door knockers, and that that
45:19
Speaker 1: is what Iowa rewards. So you know, I'd probably put
45:22
Speaker 1: Iowa one, but you could have other Midwestern states too.
45:25
Speaker 1: Wisconsin would be a good one for them, and and Minnesota,
45:29
Speaker 1: but all of those would be the Midwest state that
45:32
Speaker 1: I would pick there because you know Minnesota too, but
45:36
Speaker 1: they both they're sort of their activist states. There's there's
45:40
Speaker 1: there's a there's a place to start you're organizing from
45:46
Speaker 1: and UH and again if Iowa you want to punish
45:49
Speaker 1: it because they didn't know how to run their caucuses.
45:51
Speaker 1: Minnesota is almost similar on that in the South. Look,
45:54
Speaker 1: there's no great state for the progressive wing in the South,
45:58
Speaker 1: but if you're if you're on the progressive side of things,
46:00
Speaker 1: you'd probably rather have Georgia in that early window than
46:02
Speaker 1: South Carolina because Atlanta does have a younger electorate, there's
46:06
Speaker 1: a different African American coalition, it's a bit more urban
46:10
Speaker 1: than South Carolina is, and so then of course it's
46:12
Speaker 1: going to be a bit more progressive in New England.
46:16
Speaker 1: I think you've got a bunch of other states to
46:17
Speaker 1: choose for a mother than New Hampshire. Right, Massachusetts could work,
46:21
Speaker 1: of Vermont could work. Maybe even a Connecticut might be
46:23
Speaker 1: the best of the three if you're on the progressive side. Thanks,
46:27
Speaker 1: because you know, this calendar would reward campaigns that are
46:31
Speaker 1: much more people powered, much more volunteer energy focused, much
46:35
Speaker 1: more essentially enamored with movement politics, ideological intensity. In all
46:40
Speaker 1: of these cases, those states would be better states for
46:44
Speaker 1: progressive than the states that they picked. And for shits
46:49
Speaker 1: and giggles, I thought I would put together what a
46:51
Speaker 1: mega calendar would look like. Right, the perfect mega calendar,
46:55
Speaker 1: I'd still probably start with Iowa. That's a big evangelical
46:58
Speaker 1: Christian base to start from there. And that's part. There's
47:01
Speaker 1: sort of you know, there's two parts to the MEGA coalition.
47:04
Speaker 1: One is one is sort of a bit more God
47:06
Speaker 1: fearing than the other one. Right, one is one is
47:09
Speaker 1: sort of the non the non religious sort of populist,
47:14
Speaker 1: and the other one is more of the religious populist.
47:16
Speaker 1: And the Iowa Republican electorate has always rewarded movement conservative
47:22
Speaker 1: candidates right with their retail politics. The evangelical organization there
47:26
Speaker 1: in the West. I would want Arizona. I mean, we
47:28
Speaker 1: just saw the Arizona primary continue to produce the further
47:33
Speaker 1: right winners in a Republican primary. So again this is
47:37
Speaker 1: if you're coming from you want to ensure a MEGA nominee,
47:40
Speaker 1: you would want Arizona in your early window, judging by
47:43
Speaker 1: the results we saw in the Arizona primary last week.
47:47
Speaker 1: And oh, by the way, you get your you get
47:49
Speaker 1: the two issues that really supposedly motivate MEGA these days, right,
47:53
Speaker 1: which is election administration, which has been a constant theme
47:57
Speaker 1: of of of maga's green vinces with Maricopa County, and
48:02
Speaker 1: of course the border and immigration in the South. It's
48:05
Speaker 1: an easy choice. It's Alabama. Right, Alabama has been right
48:09
Speaker 1: the probably the friendly estate there's been to Trump. It
48:13
Speaker 1: is where sort of arguably where MEGA had its first
48:17
Speaker 1: big moment. I'll never forget his first big rally and mobile. Right,
48:20
Speaker 1: his first endorsement from a US senator came from then
48:24
Speaker 1: the junior senator from Alabama and Jeff Sessions. So to me,
48:29
Speaker 1: Alabama much easier than getting involved in the complicated politics
48:32
Speaker 1: of South Carolina. And then in New England, it's sort
48:36
Speaker 1: of the way there's no ideal candidate for progressives in
48:39
Speaker 1: the South, there's no ideal candidate for MAGA in New England,
48:42
Speaker 1: and in the northeast, New Hampshire is probably still their
48:44
Speaker 1: best bet. Right. Trump has repeatedly shown unusual strength there.
48:50
Speaker 1: But you know, here's the irony. Right, the far left,
48:52
Speaker 1: the progressives and MAGA wanted to forge a coalition to
48:57
Speaker 1: agree on one early state that they both would love
49:01
Speaker 1: to have, right Wisconsin Bernie Sanders, Scott Walker, Ron Johnson,
49:08
Speaker 1: Tammy Baldon. Right, they may nominate a progressive socialist for
49:15
Speaker 1: governor on the Democratic side. The state, though, really rewards
49:20
Speaker 1: hardcore conservatives hard core progressives. Right, it is a state
49:23
Speaker 1: without sling voters basically so, and they've always been open
49:29
Speaker 1: to movement politics left and right, so if they if
49:33
Speaker 1: you wanted some sort of unholy coalition between the populace
49:36
Speaker 1: left and the populist right. When it comes to the
49:38
Speaker 1: primary calendar, Wisconsin is probably the number one draft pick
49:42
Speaker 1: as being that. So, look, you may think at primary
49:46
Speaker 1: calendar tells candidates where a campaign where to campaign, No
49:50
Speaker 1: it doesn't. What the calendar actually tells is who they
49:53
Speaker 1: have to become in order to succeed. And that's why
49:57
Speaker 1: this calendar is a much bigger deal than just putting
50:00
Speaker 1: dates in your daybook. Okay, this is one of the
50:04
Speaker 1: few documents in politics that actually reveal a political party's
50:10
Speaker 1: assumptions about what it wants to be, what coalition does
50:14
Speaker 1: it trust, What voters do the party want candidates talking
50:19
Speaker 1: to first, What style of campaign do they want rewarding?
50:23
Speaker 1: What kind of nominee do they believe can win. Candidates
50:28
Speaker 1: are going to spend the next year arguing over all
50:30
Speaker 1: sorts of issues that will sound probably be mostly the same.
50:34
Speaker 1: But how they do now change is because of where
50:37
Speaker 1: they start, and starting in South Carolina is already going
50:42
Speaker 1: to reshape this conversation so I know you probably thought, God,
50:50
Speaker 1: I can't believe you wanted to spend that much time
50:51
Speaker 1: on the primary calendar. I think it is that important.
50:55
Speaker 1: I think it is that instructive. Again and again, best
51:01
Speaker 1: laid plans can totally get changed because again I go
51:05
Speaker 1: back to the intent of the Democratic primary calendar of
51:08
Speaker 1: the eighties was to nominate southern governors, and they got
51:12
Speaker 1: Walter Mondale and Michael Dacacas. They didn't get their southern governors. Right.
51:17
Speaker 1: The Jackson campaign totally upended that that intent of the
51:24
Speaker 1: party bosses and what they were trying to do by
51:27
Speaker 1: creating Super Tuesday in the first place, Right, they created
51:30
Speaker 1: Super Tuesday to try to balance out base voters that
51:36
Speaker 1: were dominating the early state votes, particularly Iowa New Hampshire. Well,
51:40
Speaker 1: now it's all being done within the inside of that
51:44
Speaker 1: early window and primary calendar. And really the two most
51:48
Speaker 1: important things that happened is where they decided to start
51:51
Speaker 1: and where they decided to end. And to me, those
51:55
Speaker 1: are the real tells as to what direction they hope
51:59
Speaker 1: this nomine nation fight takes. Love to get your feedback
52:03
Speaker 1: on this, because we're going to be probably strategying, strategorizing
52:10
Speaker 1: on this calendar, oh between now and January twenty second,
52:15
Speaker 1: twenty twenty eight, when the actual South Carolina primary takes place.
52:20
Speaker 1: All right, I got a few a handful of notebook
52:23
Speaker 1: items that normally would have been bigger segments, but I
52:27
Speaker 1: wanted to devote essentially this call it a primary calendar primer, right,
52:32
Speaker 1: but the Democratic Party And again, by the way, this
52:35
Speaker 1: isn't technically the final calendar yet, but it might as
52:37
Speaker 1: well be. This has been improving committee. I will get
52:39
Speaker 1: approved by the full DNC. I throw that caveat out there,
52:42
Speaker 1: because you never know, right, maybe me pointing out that
52:45
Speaker 1: this is in good progressives means that there's this huge
52:47
Speaker 1: progressive revolt about this calendar, but they were. There's one
52:52
Speaker 1: other aspect of this. Dan Pfeiffer alerted me of this
52:55
Speaker 1: because I used to it. I had a tweet over
52:57
Speaker 1: the weekend about how uninspiring I felt this primary calend
53:00
Speaker 1: debate was, and he concurred, but he said, remember, they're
53:03
Speaker 1: sort of they're they're blocked in by you know what
53:08
Speaker 1: states do they have legislative control where they can actually
53:11
Speaker 1: change the date of a primary, meaning that they were
53:14
Speaker 1: sort of stuck where there were blue legislatures. South Carolina
53:17
Speaker 1: was already sort of it's baked into the law so
53:19
Speaker 1: that they know they can that's already done. They don't
53:22
Speaker 1: have to ask the legislature for something else. But if
53:25
Speaker 1: you know, I think Kansas would be a better place
53:27
Speaker 1: in the Midwest than Iowa, for instance. You know, go
53:29
Speaker 1: for a state you're trying to grow in the problem
53:31
Speaker 1: there republican legislature that probably wouldn't cooperate about moving dates.
53:36
Speaker 1: That would have been a challenge in Arizona if you
53:38
Speaker 1: wanted to shift from Nevada to Arizona, because Arizona is
53:41
Speaker 1: not a legislature that is controlled by the Democrat. By
53:43
Speaker 1: the way, Oregon would have been an interesting place too,
53:46
Speaker 1: but they have the mail in ballots, and it's clear
53:48
Speaker 1: in these states with mail in ballots, the DNC doesn't
53:51
Speaker 1: want to have to wait multiple days to find out
53:53
Speaker 1: a result. Again, there's there's there's a lot of hypocritical
54:01
Speaker 1: t being circulated right on that very issue. But this
54:08
Speaker 1: is how definitional and how important this announcement and this
54:15
Speaker 1: decision is. So get ready to learn a lot more
54:20
Speaker 1: about South Carolina politics and a lot more about the geography.
54:24
Speaker 1: You're going to hear things like the Piedmont, the Upstate.
54:27
Speaker 1: You're gonna hear all sorts of things that in eighteen
54:30
Speaker 1: months will become second nature to you, particularly if you're
54:34
Speaker 1: a listener to this podcast. All right, before we get
54:37
Speaker 1: to John, alright, I do have a few things. Call
54:39
Speaker 1: it my notebook from the weekend. And again, all of
54:42
Speaker 1: these might have been bigger segments, but I really and
54:45
Speaker 1: again I get you may think it's a little wonky
54:47
Speaker 1: to spend that much time on a calendar, But the
54:50
Speaker 1: calendar is the campaign, folks, And you know, ultimately presidential
54:56
Speaker 1: politics is the is the super Bowl here that we're
54:59
Speaker 1: all that we're all focused on. So look, since we're
55:02
Speaker 1: talking about the DNC, you know, oh my goodness, who's
55:08
Speaker 1: going to referee the presidential primary? Because I think if
55:12
Speaker 1: you have lost faith in if you hadn't lost faith
55:15
Speaker 1: in Ken Martin is DNC chair, after reading Sunday's New
55:18
Speaker 1: York Times, you will now the biggest thing that jumped
55:23
Speaker 1: out of me it is not just the massive money problem,
55:26
Speaker 1: because yes, the DNC isn't being trusted with money, but
55:29
Speaker 1: it's not like Democrats are being denied money. The money
55:31
Speaker 1: is just money is just not being written to the DNC,
55:35
Speaker 1: still getting sent to the d SCC, the d Triple C,
55:38
Speaker 1: the DGA directly to candidates. So it's not necessarily the
55:42
Speaker 1: money problem per se. But you got to ask yourself,
55:45
Speaker 1: is Ken Martin just the right person in this job
55:48
Speaker 1: to oversee you know he does? The DNC chair at
55:50
Speaker 1: a presidential race is essentially the referee. Is this the
55:53
Speaker 1: person democrats want serving? Is their lead referee for what?
55:56
Speaker 1: Because what's likely to be a wide open and pretty
56:01
Speaker 1: rough presidential nomination fight? Because when you read this story,
56:05
Speaker 1: apparently Ken Martin thinks every disagreement is the start of
56:08
Speaker 1: a coup against him. His paranoia has gotten the best
56:12
Speaker 1: of him. The fact that his tone to staff is
56:17
Speaker 1: if I fail, you fail, boy. It's like it's the
56:22
Speaker 1: other way around. I mean, I mean, the guy is
56:24
Speaker 1: a terrible leader. If that's how he's speaking, he's basically
56:27
Speaker 1: making everybody feel as if they owe him. Don't you
56:31
Speaker 1: work for the organization? Don't you work for the party first,
56:34
Speaker 1: not for Ken Martin first? So if he views every
56:37
Speaker 1: leak as personal, I mean, I just think he's not
56:40
Speaker 1: in the right head space. Look, it's a debacle. Perhaps
56:43
Speaker 1: he wasn't ready for the job. Perhaps he thought the
56:46
Speaker 1: job was, you know, state party chair on steroids. But
56:51
Speaker 1: you know, this, to me was the mistake of electing
56:53
Speaker 1: somebody who's never been in a swing state. Yeah, you know,
56:56
Speaker 1: Minnesota's not a swing state. Minnesota is an easy state
56:59
Speaker 1: to be Democratic Party chair for. You can screw it up,
57:01
Speaker 1: and he didn't screw it up. Don't get me wrong.
57:03
Speaker 1: You can screw it up, but he didn't screw it up.
57:05
Speaker 1: So he's certainly a good party chair in a blue state.
57:07
Speaker 1: But that doesn't mean you're a good national party chair.
57:09
Speaker 1: So I you know, the piece is troubling if you're
57:14
Speaker 1: a donor to the party, if you're a longtime supporter
57:17
Speaker 1: of the party, if you're a former president watching all
57:19
Speaker 1: this this guy again, I mean, he sees he sees
57:24
Speaker 1: paranoia around every corner. That's not what you want out
57:29
Speaker 1: of your DNC chair heading to what's likely to be
57:31
Speaker 1: the most competitive Democratic primary we've had since two thousand
57:33
Speaker 1: and eight. My word, what it just not good on
57:40
Speaker 1: that front. And yeah, the money thing is disastrous, don't
57:45
Speaker 1: get me wrong. It's terrible for the DNC. But it's
57:49
Speaker 1: clearly a reflection on him. I don't think it's a
57:52
Speaker 1: reflection on the party itself. It's a reflection on lack
57:54
Speaker 1: of trust in him. So you've got to get a
57:56
Speaker 1: different party chair at this point. The thing is is
58:00
Speaker 1: that given the distrust there is in the base with
58:03
Speaker 1: the you know, it's like who do you want to
58:04
Speaker 1: picking it right or trust? You know, it has to
58:08
Speaker 1: come from the membership. You can't have it being decided
58:10
Speaker 1: by Schumer and Jeffries. I get that that's a bad
58:12
Speaker 1: look too, but you know, you had I wonder if
58:17
Speaker 1: there was a do over, right, if you just had
58:19
Speaker 1: the same vote among v NC members Ben Wickler or
58:24
Speaker 1: Ken Martin. Ben Wickler, of course, was now the former
58:27
Speaker 1: state party chair of the Wisconsin Democratic Party, versus a
58:30
Speaker 1: swing state Democratic Party chair versus somebody who'd never had
58:34
Speaker 1: to be involved in a swing state per se, you know,
58:38
Speaker 1: semi competitive races, but Minnesota in a swing state could be.
58:41
Speaker 1: But it ain't there yet. Now I want to move
58:52
Speaker 1: to around over the weekend, some of you may have
58:54
Speaker 1: seen a social video that I put out there just
58:57
Speaker 1: sort of. It was one of those he's doing it again,
59:00
Speaker 1: you know, he's beloviating on Thursday. You know, if you listen,
59:04
Speaker 1: if he saw it. Apparently the United States. Once again,
59:07
Speaker 1: he spoke to Axios and he told Axios major escalation
59:11
Speaker 1: in Iran is on its way. Here it comes, and
59:14
Speaker 1: you're like, oh, here he goes again. This is the
59:16
Speaker 1: boy who cried war right instead of the boy who
59:19
Speaker 1: cried wolf. And he's his rhetoric is my god. We
59:24
Speaker 1: know it's meaningless, but he's somehow making it less meaningful
59:28
Speaker 1: with every utterance he makes about Iran. He keeps using
59:32
Speaker 1: civilization during the rhetoric, only to back away. The guy
59:36
Speaker 1: eats tacos now every day. It ain't just Paco Tuesday.
59:39
Speaker 1: Because less than twelve hours after he once again used
59:42
Speaker 1: made some over the top threat at the Iranians, he
59:47
Speaker 1: halted the new strikes. So here's the larger problem this
59:50
Speaker 1: is created. He is completely cheap in presidential rhetoric. And yes,
59:54
Speaker 1: you could say, oh geez, that happened. You know, his
59:58
Speaker 1: inaugural address when he's sort of created this dystopian view
1:00:02
Speaker 1: of the world where George W. Bush was caught on
1:00:05
Speaker 1: a hot mic saying that was some crazy shit. And yeah,
1:00:10
Speaker 1: I think former President Bush was speaking for all of
1:00:13
Speaker 1: us when he used the word carnage and all that
1:00:16
Speaker 1: sort of garbage. So we know that Trump's presidential rhetoric
1:00:20
Speaker 1: has been garbage and carnage, if you will, from the
1:00:23
Speaker 1: get go. But my goodness, has he cheapened it and
1:00:26
Speaker 1: this harms it. Nobody can take the president's word to
1:00:29
Speaker 1: mean anything, you know, And that's the thing. It's not
1:00:33
Speaker 1: because every threat is false, but nobody knows which stood
1:00:36
Speaker 1: is real. And now markets discountant, allies discountant, adversaries discountant.
1:00:42
Speaker 1: He's gribed more so many times. People no longer know
1:00:44
Speaker 1: what deserves attention. And here's the bigger issue, why is
1:00:48
Speaker 1: he doing this? He's completely out of ideas.
1:00:50
Speaker 2: On Iran.
1:00:51
Speaker 1: The air campaign didn't produce the outcome he wanted, right,
1:00:53
Speaker 1: That was the shortcut he wanted to take. Here, the
1:00:57
Speaker 1: economic pressure has not produced the outcome he wanted. The blockade,
1:01:02
Speaker 1: the financial inducements i e. Bribery of Iranian officials hasn't
1:01:06
Speaker 1: produced the outcome that he wanted. And he's stuck. What's left.
1:01:10
Speaker 1: He's totally in a box. He's out of ideas because
1:01:13
Speaker 1: all he has left is full scale war and regime change,
1:01:17
Speaker 1: and he doesn't have the political capital to do that.
1:01:19
Speaker 1: So he's stuck and ironically this him being stuck has
1:01:24
Speaker 1: only strengthened Iran's position more than a week in it.
1:01:28
Speaker 1: And speaking of strengthening Iran, let's talk about the pretty
1:01:33
Speaker 1: much the dumbest thing an American president has now done
1:01:38
Speaker 1: this century. And this is over and above starting the
1:01:42
Speaker 1: Iraq War in search of WNB that didn't exist, and
1:01:45
Speaker 1: over and above starting the Iran War that in theory
1:01:48
Speaker 1: was to prevent nuclear proliferation, right, And in some ways,
1:01:52
Speaker 1: why did we go to War of the rack worried
1:01:55
Speaker 1: about WMD's weapons of mass destruction in theory nuclear proliferation.
1:02:01
Speaker 1: So what does the United States do basically say We're
1:02:07
Speaker 1: gonna help Saudi Arabia start a nuclear program? Does that
1:02:11
Speaker 1: do undermine the entire rationale for pretty much the entire
1:02:15
Speaker 1: foreign policy of the United States in the last twenty
1:02:18
Speaker 1: years in the Middle East. Honestly, for forty years, the
1:02:23
Speaker 1: American Middle East policy is that we really had one
1:02:26
Speaker 1: central principle beyond defending Israel, preventing nuclear proliferation, preventing a
1:02:32
Speaker 1: Middle East arms race, right, preventing Iran from getting the
1:02:37
Speaker 1: bomb was to make sure Saudi's didn't think they had
1:02:40
Speaker 1: to get the bomb, and to make sure the Egyptians
1:02:42
Speaker 1: didn't think so, and you name it. And now the
1:02:50
Speaker 1: United States is facilitating a civilian nuclear agreement with Saudi Arabia,
1:02:56
Speaker 1: and I get it. The administration's answer might be, Hey,
1:02:58
Speaker 1: better we supervise it than letting the Saudis run to
1:03:01
Speaker 1: China or Russia or use bad technology from Pakistan to
1:03:05
Speaker 1: do it. It's a legitimate argument. I'm not gonna discount.
1:03:11
Speaker 1: But if that's your argument, then you have to answer this.
1:03:13
Speaker 1: How do you explain denying Iran a similar civilian framework
1:03:16
Speaker 1: under even tougher expections? Sit on that front minute, because
1:03:23
Speaker 1: whether you support the Saudi agreement or not, it fundamentally
1:03:26
Speaker 1: changes the entire logic we've used to justify forty years
1:03:29
Speaker 1: of Iran policy, let alone our policies in the rock.
1:03:33
Speaker 1: This is just insanity to me. And again, you can
1:03:40
Speaker 1: I accept the argument. I'm not saying I fully agree
1:03:44
Speaker 1: with it. I accept the premise if your argument is, hey,
1:03:47
Speaker 1: this cat's out of the bag. If we don't help them,
1:03:50
Speaker 1: you know, they'll just do what everybody else has done
1:03:52
Speaker 1: over the last twenty years, which is go find, you know,
1:03:55
Speaker 1: go bribe rogue nuclear scientists in Pakistan. Right, that's how
1:04:00
Speaker 1: when North Korea started, It's it's system, It's how the
1:04:03
Speaker 1: Iranians worked, right. The Pakistani have not been very secure
1:04:08
Speaker 1: with their nuclear knowledge and their technology, and it has
1:04:11
Speaker 1: certainly helped spread and proliferate nuclear weapons and nuclear programs
1:04:17
Speaker 1: around the world. But if the United States is now
1:04:20
Speaker 1: going to actively nuclearize a country like Saudi Arabia, then
1:04:26
Speaker 1: who are we to tell the Iranians? Know? Who are
1:04:28
Speaker 1: we to tell anybody now? And we're going to do
1:04:31
Speaker 1: this or look, we've already looked the other way with
1:04:33
Speaker 1: the Israelis on nuclear proliferation. I mean, good grief, and look,
1:04:41
Speaker 1: I get it. I'm not going to sling a I'm
1:04:49
Speaker 1: with most people where I assume there's some sort of
1:04:51
Speaker 1: financial gain that Trump and his family and cronies are
1:04:55
Speaker 1: going to have out of this. You know that that
1:04:58
Speaker 1: may have accelerated this. But if you were going to
1:05:06
Speaker 1: do this, then why bother starting they ran war? What
1:05:10
Speaker 1: the hell were you thinking? Uh? Main, Senate the dog
1:05:19
Speaker 1: that didn't bark. Think about where we were three weeks ago.
1:05:23
Speaker 1: Looked like demons in disarray. This is a disaster. Take
1:05:27
Speaker 1: Maine off the board. Democrats are going to have to
1:05:30
Speaker 1: find another seat to go find therefore to see if
1:05:34
Speaker 1: they can win control the Senate. Well, this replacement primary
1:05:40
Speaker 1: was the dog that didn't bark. Troy Jackson was essentially
1:05:47
Speaker 1: ran away with this nomination. Out organized everybody pretty quickly,
1:05:51
Speaker 1: and what looked like a total and complete mess for
1:05:53
Speaker 1: the Democrats is suddenly back to being a very winnable
1:05:56
Speaker 1: race for the Democrats because the biggest development that's taken
1:06:01
Speaker 1: place for main Senate in the last two weeks is
1:06:03
Speaker 1: that nothing dramatic has happened. Domination was orderly. Republicans are
1:06:08
Speaker 1: trying really hard to make Graham Platner the issue. They
1:06:10
Speaker 1: did this little video that AI video that morph Plattner's
1:06:13
Speaker 1: face into into Jackson's face. I think it's kind of
1:06:17
Speaker 1: weak tea. I see what they were doing for their
1:06:20
Speaker 1: for their supporters, and I don't think anybody's gonna care
1:06:23
Speaker 1: about Graham Platner in literally three weeks. I'm not sure
1:06:25
Speaker 1: they care now. Right, That is all feels like it's
1:06:28
Speaker 1: already it's already sort of gone away, if you will, right,
1:06:35
Speaker 1: I think the biggest story here is that Democrats avoided
1:06:37
Speaker 1: a devisive nomination. Right now and now it's not automatically
1:06:43
Speaker 1: bad news for Susan Collins, but it's certainly worse news
1:06:48
Speaker 1: than where Republicans thought this race was headed a month ago.
1:06:50
Speaker 1: And then, of course, if you look at the last
1:06:51
Speaker 1: two weeks, right, not only have Democrats not had a
1:06:54
Speaker 1: divisive primary fight over replacing Platner, but Donald Trump went
1:06:58
Speaker 1: out of his way to say, hey, hang on, I
1:06:59
Speaker 1: would make sure that where Republicans are suddenly feeling better
1:07:02
Speaker 1: about Maine, in Michigan, Donald Trump is saying no, no, no, no, no,
1:07:06
Speaker 1: hold my non alcoholic beer. I'm gonna make sure Republicans
1:07:10
Speaker 1: cannot win in Maine in Michigan because I'm gonna announce
1:07:13
Speaker 1: more tariffs against Canada, and I'm gonna make sure Ice
1:07:17
Speaker 1: does crazy shit in Maine to make Susan collins life miserable.
1:07:21
Speaker 1: I mean, it is what he has done to Mike
1:07:24
Speaker 1: Rogers over tariffs in that Gordy Howbridge in Michigan, and
1:07:28
Speaker 1: what he's done to Susan Collins. Donald if those two
1:07:31
Speaker 1: both lose, they literally can point the finger at Donald
1:07:36
Speaker 1: John Trump. He is actively making those can campaigns harder
1:07:43
Speaker 1: to win. He is actively going out of his way
1:07:46
Speaker 1: to do it. But I mean again we you know,
1:07:49
Speaker 1: Dems in disarray, not in Maine and not anymore. And
1:07:55
Speaker 1: speaking of tariffs again, you know, look, we're at that
1:08:02
Speaker 1: hundred day mark and I did my whole hundre day
1:08:04
Speaker 1: spiel for you last week, and you're seeing a lot
1:08:07
Speaker 1: of it. And there's no doubt, right, Republicans have benefited
1:08:10
Speaker 1: from the redistricting, the better maps and all this stuff.
1:08:14
Speaker 1: But the biggest problem Republicans have is not the structure
1:08:17
Speaker 1: of how many battleground House seats there are, how many
1:08:20
Speaker 1: Senate seats are in play. The Publicans' biggest problem is
1:08:22
Speaker 1: Donald Trump just does not have any idea what's going
1:08:25
Speaker 1: on in American politics at the moment. It is the
1:08:31
Speaker 1: fact that this White House just just has no idea
1:08:33
Speaker 1: how to read a room. Right. The following came directly
1:08:38
Speaker 1: from the White House's own weekly call it their bragging sheet. Right,
1:08:42
Speaker 1: they put out all the stuff that they thought was
1:08:46
Speaker 1: good things that happened to the administration this weekend. One
1:08:49
Speaker 1: of their top accomplishments was putting more tariffs on Europe.
1:08:54
Speaker 1: And why were they doing it? The White House release said,
1:08:57
Speaker 1: in ordered to protect big tech. What the EU was
1:09:01
Speaker 1: unfair to Google, Apple, Meta and Amazon. They were unfairly
1:09:06
Speaker 1: regulating those companies, unfairly targeting them with fines. So we're
1:09:10
Speaker 1: going to reciprocate and find the EU for finding those
1:09:15
Speaker 1: good American big tech companies. So think about that. The
1:09:18
Speaker 1: populist administration raising tariffs that, by the way, are all
1:09:24
Speaker 1: just tax heights for American consumers, right, tax heights on us,
1:09:30
Speaker 1: in order to defend big tech in this political environment.
1:09:36
Speaker 1: Talk about misreading a room, Susie Wiles, I'm surprised you
1:09:42
Speaker 1: agreed to this release going out this is I get that,
1:09:46
Speaker 1: this is what he did this week, and it is
1:09:48
Speaker 1: notable that Donald Trump goes out of his way to
1:09:50
Speaker 1: protect big tech from European regulation. So if he's going
1:09:56
Speaker 1: to protect them from European regulation, imagine what he's doing
1:09:59
Speaker 1: to protect Americans. Not protect Americans from American regulation of
1:10:05
Speaker 1: big tech. I mean, it just hands you know. I mean,
1:10:10
Speaker 1: these ads are easy to write. This administration cares so
1:10:13
Speaker 1: much about protecting the profits of big tech that he
1:10:16
Speaker 1: literally punishes other countries for trying to regulate them. He's
1:10:21
Speaker 1: so intent on handing the country over to big tech
1:10:25
Speaker 1: and handing them your farm land for data centers. I
1:10:27
Speaker 1: mean it just rights itself, and they put it in
1:10:32
Speaker 1: their own Look at all the great accomplishments we made
1:10:35
Speaker 1: this week. I'm gonna have a lot more to say
1:10:38
Speaker 1: about data centers of what's going on here. It came
1:10:40
Speaker 1: up twice in a row in my Newsphere interviews over
1:10:43
Speaker 1: the last two weeks, one with Meyern Donalds two weeks ago,
1:10:46
Speaker 1: my most recent one on Newsphere with Doug Jones. He
1:10:49
Speaker 1: basically said, it's the single biggest issue in Alabama right now,
1:10:55
Speaker 1: the fact that the White House has not understand how
1:10:58
Speaker 1: angry America is at every one of these Silicon Valley companies,
1:11:02
Speaker 1: and they are going to brag about protecting these companies
1:11:06
Speaker 1: from European regulation. Who that is a big giant political
1:11:15
Speaker 1: cell phone or I guess you'd call it an own
1:11:18
Speaker 1: goal on this one for the White House. Obama, Caitlin Clark,
1:11:25
Speaker 1: Donald Trump, Lebron James of all days, right, the culture
1:11:28
Speaker 1: wars are politics. We know it's all been fused together,
1:11:32
Speaker 1: but if you needed to understand the difference between Barack
1:11:35
Speaker 1: Obama and Donald Trump, we got a clear contrast. On Thursday,
1:11:42
Speaker 1: on the same day, Donald Trump is asked about Lebron
1:11:45
Speaker 1: James you know, if you've got any thoughts on Lebron
1:11:47
Speaker 1: James going to Philadelphia, and what did he do. He
1:11:50
Speaker 1: turned it into some grievance thing, something about, wow, I've
1:11:53
Speaker 1: never liked Lebron James. And he basically said he doesn't
1:11:55
Speaker 1: like Lebron James because Lebron James doesn't like him. And
1:11:58
Speaker 1: then he just throws out there, well, maybe Lebron James
1:12:01
Speaker 1: is a racist. No idea how he's trying to you know,
1:12:05
Speaker 1: it's sort of everything Trump says when he says stuff
1:12:07
Speaker 1: like that. It's sort of like in the old days
1:12:09
Speaker 1: when we were kids, you know, when you had nothing
1:12:12
Speaker 1: to say back to somebody, you just say, well, yeah,
1:12:14
Speaker 1: your mama, right, And that's in some way Trump didn't
1:12:18
Speaker 1: know how to attack James says racist, right, he just
1:12:22
Speaker 1: defaulted to grievance. But his instinct was to divide. That's
1:12:26
Speaker 1: always his instinct, divide, divide, divide, personal tax. Meanwhile, Barack
1:12:31
Speaker 1: Obama on that same day happened to stop by the
1:12:34
Speaker 1: practice session for the WNBAL starting and you see this
1:12:38
Speaker 1: video and he and he goes out of his way.
1:12:40
Speaker 1: He seeks out Caitlyn Clark. Right, she's been someone who's
1:12:44
Speaker 1: become a political symbol, not because she's asked to be,
1:12:46
Speaker 1: but because it gets weaponized, particularly by the right, and
1:12:50
Speaker 1: they sort of use Caitlyn Clark to attack the cultural left.
1:12:53
Speaker 1: And Kaitlyn Clark gets just shoved and she is you
1:12:57
Speaker 1: show me anywhere where she is asked for to be
1:13:00
Speaker 1: a political anything in this right. Yet she's been turned
1:13:05
Speaker 1: into a political symbol by other people. And I think
1:13:08
Speaker 1: the fact that she is just she's just about mostly
1:13:12
Speaker 1: kept her cool on this is pretty impressive. What was
1:13:16
Speaker 1: interesting is Obama went out of his way and he
1:13:18
Speaker 1: didn't have a political message for it was a personal message. Hey,
1:13:21
Speaker 1: keep being yourself, don't lose your joy, don't let everybody
1:13:24
Speaker 1: else define you. So here you had the same day,
1:13:27
Speaker 1: we had two presidents, two completely different instincts. One uses
1:13:32
Speaker 1: culture to divide and thinks he's scoring a political point
1:13:35
Speaker 1: with his base. The other tries to lower the temperature.
1:13:42
Speaker 1: I could tell you the type of president I'm looking for,
1:13:44
Speaker 1: and I don't care if it's left or right. I
1:13:46
Speaker 1: want one that it's trying to speak to a majority
1:13:50
Speaker 1: of Americans. And Donald Trump does not. Donald Trump goes
1:13:56
Speaker 1: out of his way not to It is one of
1:14:00
Speaker 1: the most amazing things. One the best attribute Barack Obama
1:14:04
Speaker 1: had was he was always looking to turn the temperature down.
1:14:09
Speaker 1: The irony is that the base of the right wing
1:14:11
Speaker 1: has convinced themselves that Barack Obama's presence was divisive. So
1:14:14
Speaker 1: they always said he was divisive, and the only evidence
1:14:17
Speaker 1: they had is because he was black. It was one
1:14:20
Speaker 1: of the most disingenuous attacks that the right has ever
1:14:24
Speaker 1: put on, and it is you want to talk about gaslighting, right,
1:14:27
Speaker 1: There's an entire right wing ecosystem that has been convinced
1:14:30
Speaker 1: that Barack Obama was a divisive political figure. It was
1:14:35
Speaker 1: talk about manufactured divisiveness. Donald Trump actively wants to be
1:14:39
Speaker 1: a divisive political figure. Barack Obama did not, does not,
1:14:44
Speaker 1: and still practices it that way. And I want to
1:14:48
Speaker 1: get out of here on this one last thing. Missus
1:14:50
Speaker 1: toodcast had an idea that I love, so I thought
1:14:52
Speaker 1: i'd share it with you. So I look, I didn't.
1:14:55
Speaker 1: I did not go back to the White House correspondence
1:14:57
Speaker 1: dinner I'm having. I'm I'm not going to leave where
1:15:02
Speaker 1: I am right now to go back to the Waldorf
1:15:06
Speaker 1: Astoria in Washington, DC. But look, it was ridiculous and
1:15:11
Speaker 1: nobody looks good doing it. And missus Todcast had a
1:15:14
Speaker 1: great idea, she said on the White House Correspondence annual
1:15:18
Speaker 1: event should be turned into a family deby that basically
1:15:22
Speaker 1: open the White House, invite the spouses, the kids, celebrate
1:15:25
Speaker 1: the families who are stuck living the crazy schedules of
1:15:29
Speaker 1: the White House Correspondence, the late nights, the constant travel,
1:15:33
Speaker 1: the pressure of covering any president, let alone this president.
1:15:37
Speaker 1: And you're celebrating the First Amendment at the people's house.
1:15:41
Speaker 1: This is not a celebration that the president would host. Instead,
1:15:47
Speaker 1: the President opens up the South Lawn to the White
1:15:51
Speaker 1: House Press Corps to do this, and it's a better
1:15:56
Speaker 1: way to celebrate yourself. It should be about the White
1:15:59
Speaker 1: House Press Corps. Shouldn't be about the culture of Washington
1:16:03
Speaker 1: or anything else. But the White House Press Corps deserves
1:16:06
Speaker 1: to have It's, you know, this idea that they're not
1:16:08
Speaker 1: allowed to celebrate themselves. But the dinner is ridiculous. There's
1:16:14
Speaker 1: no in our divisive politics, it doesn't work. I'm sorry,
1:16:16
Speaker 1: it doesn't. A better way to celebrate the White House
1:16:21
Speaker 1: Press Corps just open up the White House South Lawn
1:16:24
Speaker 1: and because you know the biggest The people that pay
1:16:28
Speaker 1: the biggest price for the for the for the White House,
1:16:31
Speaker 1: for people that work in the at the at the
1:16:32
Speaker 1: White House press shops are the families. And you know,
1:16:36
Speaker 1: give them one thing a year, right, kids get to
1:16:39
Speaker 1: hang out at the White House Southlawn something like that. Uh,
1:16:43
Speaker 1: it would be a better way to celebrate the First
1:16:44
Speaker 1: Amendment and the symbol of this being done at the
1:16:48
Speaker 1: people's you know, yes, it's the house the president lives in,
1:16:51
Speaker 1: but it does not belong to the president, which is
1:16:55
Speaker 1: why it's a it's a it's the right place for
1:16:58
Speaker 1: this celebration to be. All there you go, end of
1:17:02
Speaker 1: my notebook for the weekend. With that, let's sneak in
1:17:06
Speaker 1: a break we come back my conversation about the future
1:17:10
Speaker 1: of sports business, media, et cetera. And the reason you
1:17:14
Speaker 1: should care because this has had a huge impact already
1:17:16
Speaker 1: on legacy media and the essentially the destruction of legacy
1:17:21
Speaker 1: journalism that's been taken a place at these big media companies.
1:17:24
Speaker 1: In some way, it's happened because of the high cost
1:17:27
Speaker 1: of sports rates. So we'll sneak at the break and
1:17:30
Speaker 1: we'll come back. John o'rat and joining me now is
1:17:42
Speaker 1: somebody I've known a long time. He and I share
1:17:46
Speaker 1: an organization on our resume, the Sports Business Journal. I
1:17:49
Speaker 1: was there when it was a sports business daily. It
1:17:51
Speaker 1: is John Oran who covers these sports industry and I
1:17:55
Speaker 1: think that that's probably the best way to describe it.
1:17:58
Speaker 1: I think some might think it's sports, but he's not.
1:18:01
Speaker 1: It's the whole, it's all of it, and he does
1:18:04
Speaker 1: it for Puck, and he does it quite well. Puck.
1:18:07
Speaker 1: For those of you who don't know, Pocket really is
1:18:09
Speaker 1: sort of a high end almost concierge's news service of
1:18:15
Speaker 1: like four big topics a tenpole in Hollywood, at tentpole
1:18:19
Speaker 1: in Silicon Valley, and a tent pole in Washington, a
1:18:21
Speaker 1: tent pole in New York. You know where money, power, politics,
1:18:26
Speaker 1: and sports of course has all of it, which is
1:18:29
Speaker 1: why I think it's been a very successful expansion. John Urn,
1:18:34
Speaker 1: who's also a d m V er. So we get
1:18:36
Speaker 1: to geek out on the Nationals at a minimum, right John, Well.
1:18:42
Speaker 2: You know I grew up in the in DC when
1:18:44
Speaker 2: we didn't have a team, so I my allegiance still
1:18:47
Speaker 2: up in Baltimore. In terms of MLBB, I.
1:18:49
Speaker 1: Did you go up. I have a couple of friends
1:18:51
Speaker 1: who are still havn't given up the Orioles. I Angelos
1:18:57
Speaker 1: made it pretty easy for me to give up the Orioles.
1:18:59
Speaker 1: It was, yeahn't that hard? I sort of. I grew
1:19:02
Speaker 1: up without a baseball team myself, right, you know what.
1:19:04
Speaker 2: Though, Like let me bring this up because like the
1:19:07
Speaker 2: Nationals one in twenty nineteen, and that's when I instantly
1:19:10
Speaker 2: regretted sticking with the Orioles.
1:19:11
Speaker 1: Of course, as you should, the learner.
1:19:13
Speaker 2: Sold everybody off. I mean, all the baseball owners, they're
1:19:15
Speaker 2: all the same, jock. Come on, I know they all.
1:19:18
Speaker 1: It is true, like David Rubinstein's turned out to be
1:19:20
Speaker 1: a disaster, and I did not. And I remember mourning
1:19:24
Speaker 1: when he went to when he bought the Orioles instead
1:19:27
Speaker 1: of BC. I thought, my god, if anybody can fix
1:19:30
Speaker 1: National monuments, it is David Rubinstein. I mean I think
1:19:34
Speaker 1: I saw him as the fixer of the Commander's, the
1:19:37
Speaker 1: fixer of and it just broke my heart when he
1:19:39
Speaker 1: went to Baltimore. But he s turned out to be
1:19:41
Speaker 1: a terrible owner.
1:19:42
Speaker 2: Well, I have a knit to pick with your intro
1:19:44
Speaker 2: because you said you were we share you know, a
1:19:48
Speaker 2: resume thing you said you were with it when it
1:19:50
Speaker 2: was Sports Pitncessdaalia. You were the original editor of Managing J.
1:19:56
Speaker 2: SBJ pretty much wouldn't exist without you. I'm going to
1:19:59
Speaker 2: give you your yours, you know, sports business bona fides, Chuck.
1:20:02
Speaker 2: I mean, you're more than just sort of a peon
1:20:04
Speaker 2: on Sports Business Daily like you were, you were the
1:20:07
Speaker 2: guy there.
1:20:07
Speaker 1: It's this thread into the sports world that gives me
1:20:10
Speaker 1: semi legitimacy. With my partnership with Jay and donde As,
1:20:13
Speaker 1: we've been doing dabbling into sports history and and you'll
1:20:18
Speaker 1: appreciate this pretty much in every one of these we've
1:20:20
Speaker 1: done four dives on these sort of dynastic franchises and
1:20:25
Speaker 1: we like Wimbledon being the previous one. I'm always obsessed
1:20:28
Speaker 1: with the business side of things and the ownership side
1:20:30
Speaker 1: of things and how all that all that has worked.
1:20:32
Speaker 1: And it's I tell you, there's nothing I enjoy more
1:20:37
Speaker 1: than the stories of old past NBA owners because the
1:20:41
Speaker 1: NBA owners could have easily been you and me, Like
1:20:44
Speaker 1: literally anybody could have gotten a team if you had
1:20:47
Speaker 1: access to an arena in the sixties or seventies. You
1:20:49
Speaker 1: want to be an owner, literally no money down, you know, well,
1:20:52
Speaker 1: we'll finance you down the road. I mean, it's so
1:20:55
Speaker 1: I really do been enjoying some just just to take
1:20:59
Speaker 1: that little and forward. They're launching something called like a
1:21:03
Speaker 1: horse racing league, and they're trying to find money.
1:21:06
Speaker 2: And the person behind the horse racing league is Greg Mathay,
1:21:09
Speaker 2: who of course used used to run Liberty, you know,
1:21:12
Speaker 2: and has oodles of money. So like, we couldn't even
1:21:16
Speaker 2: do a horse racing team or a horse racing league.
1:21:19
Speaker 2: But back in the day, yeah, just anybody could own
1:21:21
Speaker 2: an NBA team for exactly.
1:21:23
Speaker 1: I remember being at a dinner with Gordon Gunn, who
1:21:26
Speaker 1: told me some crazy stories. David sterned begging him please
1:21:30
Speaker 1: take the Cavaliers. It was like, you know, please help
1:21:33
Speaker 1: us out here. You know. Of course turned out to
1:21:35
Speaker 1: be the best business decision he ever made, right, But
1:21:38
Speaker 1: it was just you know, the NBA in the seventies
1:21:41
Speaker 1: man on that front, and we did the Warriors, and
1:21:45
Speaker 1: you realize so many of those teams were literally they
1:21:48
Speaker 1: didn't know if the paychecks would clear. Yeah, which is
1:21:52
Speaker 1: which is a lot of fun. But I want to
1:21:53
Speaker 1: start with sort of look first, I'm always fascinated when
1:21:59
Speaker 1: some body enters the club of sort of one hundred.
1:22:04
Speaker 1: For me, the club of one hundred is owning one
1:22:06
Speaker 1: of a major league sports franchise. It's a little bit
1:22:08
Speaker 1: more than a hundred franchises. But the club of one hundred,
1:22:12
Speaker 1: who are these folks in Seattle? Ten billion dollars the
1:22:15
Speaker 1: new floor for an NFL franchise. Are these going to
1:22:19
Speaker 1: be people who will be famous? Or will these this
1:22:23
Speaker 1: be an ownership group that will always have to Google
1:22:25
Speaker 1: to find out who it is.
1:22:26
Speaker 2: You know, we don't know that yet because you don't
1:22:31
Speaker 2: know until they take ownership over the team. So sort
1:22:35
Speaker 2: of how they're going to work with the league, and
1:22:36
Speaker 2: how they how much they want to work with the
1:22:39
Speaker 2: league and the uh, you know, the some microchip business
1:22:44
Speaker 2: or the Silicon Valley business and all of a sudden,
1:22:47
Speaker 2: now you can own an NFL team. But I think
1:22:49
Speaker 2: that's the story that really intrigues me about Seattle Truck
1:22:53
Speaker 2: is just this has to be among the last like
1:22:58
Speaker 2: family financed purchases. I mean, this is why, well we keep.
1:23:02
Speaker 1: Saying this, We've been saying that the end we are
1:23:05
Speaker 1: ending an era of the family owned team, right like
1:23:09
Speaker 1: the Raiders. Essentially, if you're not second or third generation,
1:23:14
Speaker 1: the allis family, you know, I mean, you know that's
1:23:17
Speaker 1: probably the next great, you know, massive sale whenever that
1:23:22
Speaker 1: happens with the McCaskey slash Alice family. But we've been
1:23:26
Speaker 1: we've been sort of writing the obituary for the family
1:23:30
Speaker 1: owned sports team for a couple of.
1:23:32
Speaker 2: Decades now, haven't we Yeah, we have, and but now
1:23:35
Speaker 2: we're actually starting to see it, which is why you
1:23:37
Speaker 2: have the all of the leagues are allowing private equity
1:23:41
Speaker 2: to come in and take bigger and bigger slices of
1:23:45
Speaker 2: the teams because there's so few people that can afford it.
1:23:48
Speaker 2: Or you know, even in our hometown with the Commanders,
1:23:51
Speaker 2: do you know it's not a fully Josh Harris funded purchase.
1:23:55
Speaker 2: He's listed as the owner, but you know there are
1:23:58
Speaker 2: a bunch of like really powerful people behind him on
1:24:00
Speaker 2: that as well.
1:24:02
Speaker 1: How did we go in three years? I mean, I
1:24:05
Speaker 1: don't know about you. Did your stock portfolio go up
1:24:07
Speaker 1: fifty percent in three years because we just went from
1:24:11
Speaker 1: the Commanders, who arguably are a ten pole franchise no
1:24:16
Speaker 1: fence to my friends and the other Washington Yes, there
1:24:19
Speaker 1: was a fire sale like mindset with the Commanders, so
1:24:22
Speaker 1: maybe there was some lesson value, but we went from
1:24:25
Speaker 1: a six billion dollar to a ten billion dollar in
1:24:29
Speaker 1: three cork me if i'm wer my transaction was three
1:24:32
Speaker 1: and a half years ago.
1:24:34
Speaker 2: Yeah, So I think that the there are a couple
1:24:38
Speaker 2: things at play here. One is that all of the
1:24:43
Speaker 2: leagues allowed the private equity to come into this.
1:24:46
Speaker 1: And the private equity has just been able to It's
1:24:48
Speaker 1: just more access to cash exactly.
1:24:50
Speaker 2: And as you said, what did you call it the
1:24:53
Speaker 2: Club of one hundred? It's an exclusive club and people
1:24:57
Speaker 2: want to get into that club.
1:24:59
Speaker 1: And simmons Is said this, you don't know the name
1:25:01
Speaker 1: of rich people unless they own a sports franchise, right,
1:25:04
Speaker 1: Like it's like, you know, it's good, they're just another
1:25:08
Speaker 1: rich guy. But now Josh Harris is a rich guy
1:25:10
Speaker 1: who owns the Sixers, and there he'd just be a
1:25:12
Speaker 1: private equity guy right outside of the financial world. Do
1:25:16
Speaker 1: you know who Ray Dalio is? Yeah, right, it's Ray
1:25:18
Speaker 1: Dalio owned the Dallas Cowboys. Everybody would know who Ray
1:25:20
Speaker 1: Dalio is.
1:25:21
Speaker 2: Yeah, Jerry Jones, we know him a chapter and verse.
1:25:25
Speaker 2: But there also is and I'm gonna I'm talking a
1:25:27
Speaker 2: little bit out of my depth here, so like if
1:25:30
Speaker 2: my knowledge is a mile wide and an inch deep.
1:25:33
Speaker 2: But there have been some sort of tax changes as
1:25:35
Speaker 2: well that sort of, you know, have helped these values
1:25:37
Speaker 2: sort of increase and the the you know, the the
1:25:41
Speaker 2: money that they pay for it, you know something about
1:25:44
Speaker 2: the taxing on it that I shouldn't better tax I'm
1:25:49
Speaker 2: a journalist, I'm not a CPA, so I have no
1:25:51
Speaker 2: clue when we as you can tell I'm starting to start.
1:25:54
Speaker 1: Here's all you need to know is that the US
1:25:56
Speaker 1: federal tax code is a freaking mess.
1:25:59
Speaker 2: Yeah that It's like, and we just dealt with them billionaires.
1:26:04
Speaker 1: Yeah, yeah, if we just dealt with the loopholes, we
1:26:06
Speaker 1: wouldn't have to worry about specialized wealth taxes and stuff.
1:26:09
Speaker 1: It's just like, if the percentage was the percentage you
1:26:12
Speaker 1: paid thirty nine percent, you pay twenty thirty eight percent,
1:26:15
Speaker 1: you paid twenty nine percent. But that is not how
1:26:18
Speaker 1: obviously we all know our tax code work. So I
1:26:21
Speaker 1: you are forgiven for that, and I get that.
1:26:24
Speaker 2: Let me ask you a quick question, because A Snyder
1:26:27
Speaker 2: bought the Redskins now commanders for you know, less like
1:26:32
Speaker 2: less than a billion dollars.
1:26:34
Speaker 1: And then remember poor old John kN Cook couldn't come
1:26:36
Speaker 1: up with the matching offer.
1:26:37
Speaker 2: Remember, yeah, try as he wanted because he didn't allow
1:26:40
Speaker 2: private equity then, and.
1:26:42
Speaker 1: He had his own tax problems by what was inherited
1:26:46
Speaker 1: from the team, Like it was a I do think
1:26:50
Speaker 1: what you're describing, and I don't. We're both on over
1:26:53
Speaker 1: our skis on this sounds like. But I think with
1:26:56
Speaker 1: the current tax code, maybe John can, maybe Jack could
1:26:59
Speaker 1: have after the team.
1:27:01
Speaker 2: Or something along those lines. But where I was going
1:27:04
Speaker 2: for this, as I used to, I started writing what
1:27:07
Speaker 2: a what a return? Bought it for less than a
1:27:09
Speaker 2: billion and sell it for six billion, and somebody was like, no,
1:27:13
Speaker 2: that's not a great return. After after you know, twenty
1:27:17
Speaker 2: years or however long he ended up having it.
1:27:20
Speaker 1: Well, he devalued it, right, he found ways to totally. Yeah.
1:27:24
Speaker 2: I mean we lived in the town. We saw it firsthand.
1:27:27
Speaker 1: Oh sure, he was a terrible steward. He cost himself
1:27:30
Speaker 1: all sorts of all sorts of sort of recurrent cash
1:27:34
Speaker 1: payments when it came to you know, the fan base
1:27:38
Speaker 1: and all of that. But I guess the question I
1:27:41
Speaker 1: have because you know, are we you know I think
1:27:47
Speaker 1: this with media rights deals, that there's no way leagues
1:27:51
Speaker 1: can continue to can get the percentage increases they get
1:27:55
Speaker 1: for their TV deals, which of course produce the increased
1:27:59
Speaker 1: valuations for these franchise fees. You know, maybe it's the
1:28:04
Speaker 1: same question people ask when the stock markets on this
1:28:06
Speaker 1: crazy run. This is a bubble, Right, this is going
1:28:10
Speaker 1: to burst and it's going to get ugly. Right, What
1:28:12
Speaker 1: am I missing? And we've never had that? We haven't
1:28:16
Speaker 1: had that in the sports world, honestly since the infamous
1:28:19
Speaker 1: billion dollar baseball deal that just essentially destroyed CBS in
1:28:24
Speaker 1: nineteen ninety and arguably cost CBS its entire you know,
1:28:29
Speaker 1: what CBS is today, You could argue begins with the
1:28:33
Speaker 1: overpaying for baseball in nineteen ninety Yeah.
1:28:36
Speaker 2: Man, that was also when the Fox came in and
1:28:39
Speaker 2: overpaid drastically for the NFL. You know, back in nineteen
1:28:42
Speaker 2: ninety three, for two hundred and fifty million they paid,
1:28:46
Speaker 2: you know, which I think is enough for like two games?
1:28:48
Speaker 1: Is redesigned? I mean, I always say, look, we started
1:28:50
Speaker 1: this in nineteen ninety four. I you know, I think
1:28:55
Speaker 1: Sports Business Daily Slash Journal can beat its chest. It
1:28:57
Speaker 1: was sort of like if it has been founded, somebody
1:29:01
Speaker 1: else would have done it because so much happened that year.
1:29:04
Speaker 1: Probably this single most important year in the history of
1:29:08
Speaker 1: the sports, of the sports industry in the United States,
1:29:11
Speaker 1: between that Fox transition, MLS launches, lockouts and baseball and
1:29:17
Speaker 1: the NHL. I mean, it was, it was, and I
1:29:19
Speaker 1: always said it was the moment that even the sports
1:29:23
Speaker 1: industry realized, oh, we're not a hobby anymore. We are
1:29:26
Speaker 1: an industry.
1:29:28
Speaker 2: So I love your question because ever since I've started
1:29:31
Speaker 2: reporting on this, which is a long time, the everybody
1:29:35
Speaker 2: has been telling me right about the bubble of sports
1:29:38
Speaker 2: media rights, it's going to happen. And then we have
1:29:41
Speaker 2: the NFL signing one hundred and ten billion dollars worth
1:29:44
Speaker 2: of deals, one hundred and ten billion, and then within
1:29:47
Speaker 2: two years that looks below market because the NBA, you know,
1:29:51
Speaker 2: those sold. It's right as well. But there's something happening
1:29:55
Speaker 2: now that I'm not willing to look. It's been going
1:29:57
Speaker 2: on for so long, I'm not willing to call it
1:29:59
Speaker 2: a bubble, but there is something happening here with the
1:30:03
Speaker 2: media business that gives me some pause. What the NFL
1:30:08
Speaker 2: is going to be fine, The NBA obviously is fine.
1:30:11
Speaker 2: I think baseball is okay. In big time college I
1:30:14
Speaker 2: think that they're fine as well, but there's a middle
1:30:17
Speaker 2: class of sports, the rights that I think, you know,
1:30:23
Speaker 2: winner could be coming for them if you take a.
1:30:25
Speaker 1: Look for referring to is this w n B A NHL?
1:30:28
Speaker 1: Is that where you would go call the middle class
1:30:30
Speaker 1: of sports?
1:30:31
Speaker 2: NHL? Would My job, Chuck, is to figure out where
1:30:35
Speaker 2: that line is drawn. But if I were the PGA Tour,
1:30:38
Speaker 2: I would be I would be concerned.
1:30:40
Speaker 1: I think that the dirty little secret about the PGA
1:30:44
Speaker 1: Tour is they have no control over the four majors,
1:30:46
Speaker 1: right exactly. Yeah, And the only thing that at this point,
1:30:50
Speaker 1: it's the only thing of valued.
1:30:51
Speaker 2: And they're right now tied to CBS, which, as you
1:30:56
Speaker 2: know you've been reading and writing about, you know, Paramount's
1:30:59
Speaker 2: debt law. They're going to have to cut costs. NBC.
1:31:04
Speaker 2: They're newly spun out from comcasts, so they you know,
1:31:06
Speaker 2: they no longer look.
1:31:08
Speaker 1: Like everybody's wondering what's coming there? Okay, I mean, you
1:31:12
Speaker 1: know somebody who owns a lot of Comcast stock, I'm wondering, Well,
1:31:17
Speaker 1: am I you know, in for a dime, in for
1:31:18
Speaker 1: a dollar, let's what does this mean?
1:31:20
Speaker 2: I wouldn't want to Comcast stock is great? I'm terrible
1:31:23
Speaker 2: on the stock market.
1:31:24
Speaker 1: But I was that they're okay, But the stock price,
1:31:28
Speaker 1: there's a reason he's doing this. Stock price has been
1:31:31
Speaker 1: tanking for a year and a half. And you know,
1:31:34
Speaker 1: it's just it's it's been nothing but a downward trend line.
1:31:37
Speaker 1: Because every look, Comcasts fell into this track. You wrote
1:31:41
Speaker 1: about this a few times. Comcast was too big to
1:31:44
Speaker 1: buy and too but too small to compete, and it
1:31:49
Speaker 1: had to figure out how could it get bigger? Well,
1:31:52
Speaker 1: you know, it's funny, and I say this. I like
1:31:56
Speaker 1: Brian Roberts. I know him a little bit, but I'm
1:31:57
Speaker 1: not going to pretend I know him really well. But
1:31:59
Speaker 1: he was look, he ran it like a family business,
1:32:02
Speaker 1: so he was very mindful of overspending. I think he
1:32:08
Speaker 1: did think he overspent on Sky, and he didn't want
1:32:10
Speaker 1: to do it again. So then what did he do?
1:32:12
Speaker 1: He came up short on Fox, came up short on
1:32:15
Speaker 1: Warner Brothers, came up short on On and I an activision,
1:32:19
Speaker 1: and I think, you know, the Sky deal spooked them.
1:32:22
Speaker 1: And then now Comcast is looking around going well, what
1:32:26
Speaker 1: are we now? And it certainly feels like it's the
1:32:30
Speaker 1: beginning of the disaggregation. I guess of the entire company. Yeah,
1:32:36
Speaker 1: and that's you're.
1:32:37
Speaker 2: Going to feel this in a lot of sectors. But
1:32:38
Speaker 2: I cover that, I cover sports, and so you know
1:32:41
Speaker 2: there are going to be there are going to be
1:32:44
Speaker 2: leagues that if the leagues don't help these networks get
1:32:48
Speaker 2: the cable operators and satellite operators who still matter. Cord
1:32:51
Speaker 2: cutting is happening, but they still matter to pay an
1:32:55
Speaker 2: added rights fee or a license fee there, then they're
1:32:58
Speaker 2: not going to be as interested. And then these leagues.
1:33:01
Speaker 2: I've been looking at Netflix and Apple and Amazon and YouTube,
1:33:07
Speaker 2: like three trillion dollar market cap companies, and and they're like,
1:33:11
Speaker 2: all right, we're gonna we're going to be fine. Well
1:33:14
Speaker 2: we're seeing with that. Like Netflix is very happy with
1:33:17
Speaker 2: just five NFL games. They don't need to carry carry everything.
1:33:23
Speaker 2: Amazon they do very well with Thursday night Football, Like,
1:33:26
Speaker 2: well what about Sunday Night Football? Do you want that?
1:33:29
Speaker 2: We're happy with. All we need is one package of games.
1:33:31
Speaker 2: So this idea that that they they're going to come
1:33:34
Speaker 2: in and keep bidding up these rights, I think is fanciful.
1:33:38
Speaker 2: I question that. And then then just one more quick
1:33:42
Speaker 2: point I want to make on that, Chuck, is if
1:33:44
Speaker 2: Amazon gives up sports tomorrow, I bet their stock goes
1:33:50
Speaker 2: up like they don't need They don't need the NFL.
1:33:54
Speaker 2: And so what I find fascinating is this relationship that
1:33:58
Speaker 2: the NFL dictates to traditional like linear TV. It's totally
1:34:03
Speaker 2: turned around when it comes to these streamers and it's
1:34:06
Speaker 2: really kind of a fascinating thing to watch.
1:34:19
Speaker 1: So the NFL can't allow itself to be priced out
1:34:23
Speaker 1: of the market for CBS, ABC and NBC and Fox.
1:34:27
Speaker 1: And at the same time, there's more money in the
1:34:30
Speaker 1: other banana stands right of streaming. But the streamers don't
1:34:35
Speaker 1: need the NFL the way. You know, look at what
1:34:42
Speaker 1: Peacock subscriptions are like. You know, when there's an NFL
1:34:46
Speaker 1: game only right, you know, they know their own churn paramount.
1:34:50
Speaker 1: Plus this UFC. They may drop golf, but they're not
1:34:53
Speaker 1: going to drop UFC right because and it may be
1:34:56
Speaker 1: that the stickier niche sports become right. You know, hockey
1:35:01
Speaker 1: I think is valuable because of its obsessive fan base.
1:35:05
Speaker 1: You know, that is somebody that putting them behind a
1:35:08
Speaker 1: paywall will probably pay. I'm not sure I would do
1:35:12
Speaker 1: that for the WNBA yet. I don't think it has
1:35:16
Speaker 1: that fan base that's ready to pay extra money. Maybe
1:35:19
Speaker 1: I'm wrong. Well, you know where we could find out?
1:35:22
Speaker 1: So I wonder on that, and it's like, I feel
1:35:27
Speaker 1: like you tell me. But the NFL seems so focused
1:35:30
Speaker 1: on how much more money it can get out of
1:35:31
Speaker 1: the streamers that it may regret essentially pricing their legacy
1:35:41
Speaker 1: broadcast partners out of the market. Right.
1:35:43
Speaker 2: I do think the NFL is conscious about not wanting
1:35:46
Speaker 2: to have the legacy media companies pay so much that
1:35:52
Speaker 2: it hurts their business. They want as much money as
1:35:55
Speaker 2: they can get. But if you're the NFL, you're also
1:35:59
Speaker 2: looking at you know, they want they want Fox to
1:36:02
Speaker 2: pay you know, let's say half a billion dollars a
1:36:06
Speaker 2: year more for their package. You know, as part of
1:36:09
Speaker 2: a renewal on Fox is saying we can we can't
1:36:11
Speaker 2: afford that. Were you know, there's no way we can
1:36:15
Speaker 2: afford that. And then Fox turns around finds and there's
1:36:19
Speaker 2: couch cushions twenty two billion dollars to buy Roku And
1:36:22
Speaker 2: the NFL is like, wait a wait a sell you
1:36:24
Speaker 2: just said so you can afford We know there's money there.
1:36:28
Speaker 2: So yeah, so that's sort of the push and pull
1:36:31
Speaker 2: that that's happening inside the NFL as well.
1:36:36
Speaker 1: One of the reactions I've had to watching Netflix put
1:36:38
Speaker 1: on live sporting events is like, take what they did
1:36:42
Speaker 1: with baseball in the home run derby and what they
1:36:44
Speaker 1: did with the opening game as well, which which I
1:36:47
Speaker 1: enjoyed their coverage. I think they clayed to cursh Off,
1:36:49
Speaker 1: I remember doing the first Maybe they know there was
1:36:54
Speaker 1: Daid Yankees Dodger. I think it was must have been
1:36:56
Speaker 1: Peacock that had the Dodgers padres. But it was really
1:36:58
Speaker 1: cool to have kersh Off commentate first game in retirement,
1:37:02
Speaker 1: and it was just it was it was great. But
1:37:06
Speaker 1: what I noticed about Netflix's coverage is that it felt familiar.
1:37:09
Speaker 1: Netflix has no sports division. There's no people you say, oh,
1:37:12
Speaker 1: that's a Netflix sports ankling. But they had people that
1:37:16
Speaker 1: you see on MLB network or they had people that
1:37:18
Speaker 1: you see on the other channels. And it got me thinking,
1:37:23
Speaker 1: is all production going to start to move in house
1:37:25
Speaker 1: with the bigger leagues and that the network partners are
1:37:28
Speaker 1: simply distributors and they take the talent and like you'll
1:37:34
Speaker 1: start to see I mean, you're almost there with how
1:37:38
Speaker 1: MLB is managing things, certainly with their TV right the
1:37:41
Speaker 1: first of all, two things. One, I think the next
1:37:44
Speaker 1: broadcasts are technically so much better than what Masson did.
1:37:48
Speaker 1: You know? We can we can. I'm not going to
1:37:50
Speaker 1: get the discussed.
1:37:51
Speaker 2: Mass in Masson didn't care about the nets.
1:37:53
Speaker 1: I think so clear right, like great, But the MLB broadcast,
1:37:58
Speaker 1: whether you're watching a Twins game, your in a NAT's game,
1:38:00
Speaker 1: you're watching a Marlins game. When I'm down here in Florida,
1:38:03
Speaker 1: they're running those as well. There. It is a higher quality, right,
1:38:08
Speaker 1: rather than hoping the regional partner will figure out how
1:38:11
Speaker 1: to do this? Is that a future? Are we going
1:38:14
Speaker 1: to see the leagues become their own production houses so
1:38:17
Speaker 1: they can continue to piece meal out games on there,
1:38:21
Speaker 1: so they control branding a little bit more, maybe even
1:38:23
Speaker 1: they even control ad sales a little bit more. Just
1:38:28
Speaker 1: watching the Netflix thing, that struck me that Netflix was
1:38:31
Speaker 1: likely doing third party stuff like that.
1:38:34
Speaker 2: You know, I'm skeptical of that. I can see where
1:38:38
Speaker 2: that's going. The PGA tour just for example, just build
1:38:41
Speaker 2: a huge production facility that down in Florida, you know.
1:38:45
Speaker 2: So with that thought in mind, within the business, there
1:38:50
Speaker 2: isn't a World Cup.
1:38:51
Speaker 1: Isn't the World Cup being broadcast? This way where really
1:38:53
Speaker 1: the broadcasters aren't doing the work. It's World Cup's own.
1:38:57
Speaker 2: Yeah, yeah, I think I was taking an issue with
1:38:59
Speaker 2: your sort of bringing it in house. I do think
1:39:01
Speaker 2: that the leagues could control because because you have you
1:39:05
Speaker 2: have in the market, you have things like you know,
1:39:06
Speaker 2: Omaha Productions or you know, I'm going to I shouldn't names.
1:39:13
Speaker 1: My production team is part of the owners of by
1:39:16
Speaker 1: production team or part owners and oh there you go.
1:39:19
Speaker 1: Well they're kind of distant cousins, We're kind of related.
1:39:22
Speaker 1: I hope to get the backsplash from Oma Connorshell and
1:39:26
Speaker 1: words and pictures. There's like ever wonder as well.
1:39:28
Speaker 2: You have a lot of sort of uh, you know,
1:39:31
Speaker 2: big production companies out there that are slowly getting more
1:39:34
Speaker 2: into live sports, and so so do I see the
1:39:38
Speaker 2: NFL sort of opening up a you know, its own
1:39:41
Speaker 2: production facility and doing that. They just sold their media
1:39:44
Speaker 2: to to ESPN. I think that the leagues have seen
1:39:48
Speaker 2: that and don't necessarily want to do it, but I
1:39:49
Speaker 2: can see them partnering with one of these independent production
1:39:54
Speaker 2: companies and then sort of controlling the video sort of
1:39:58
Speaker 2: that way, you know, as opposed to isn't.
1:40:00
Speaker 1: What ESPN is pivoting to is a business themselves. Right,
1:40:02
Speaker 1: they're now the operator of MLB TV. What does that mean?
1:40:07
Speaker 1: Are they the.
1:40:07
Speaker 2: Distributor or are they the operator? Uh, they're the distributor
1:40:11
Speaker 2: right now. And that's a deal. That's a deal that
1:40:13
Speaker 2: only lasts for another like two years and then and
1:40:16
Speaker 2: then they'll have to renegotiate it. But that's that's more
1:40:18
Speaker 2: of a streaming play of trying to grow their app
1:40:21
Speaker 2: because you know, if you want to watch the nets
1:40:24
Speaker 2: and stream it as opposed to buying cable, then you
1:40:28
Speaker 2: would go through ESPN to to get that.
1:40:30
Speaker 1: There's still the single best functioning league based app as MLBS.
1:40:35
Speaker 2: Yeah, that's incredible.
1:40:36
Speaker 1: Isn't it. Like well, they were always ahead of the game. Yeah,
1:40:40
Speaker 1: they were always early on this. And it's funny, right
1:40:42
Speaker 1: for for the for the sport that's always the most
1:40:45
Speaker 1: tradition bound, right, the sport that's thought of to be
1:40:48
Speaker 1: too slow for the modern air. All these things much
1:40:52
Speaker 1: much better on the streaming side, and that's that's a
1:40:55
Speaker 1: legacy of bud ceiling and bud ceiling when you talk
1:40:59
Speaker 1: about that.
1:41:00
Speaker 2: It's funny now to listen to NBA people talk about
1:41:03
Speaker 2: the MLB and saying like, I wish we could change
1:41:05
Speaker 2: like them, because they have. They've brought in a clock
1:41:08
Speaker 2: to baseball. Who would have ever thought in the in
1:41:11
Speaker 2: the bud Seally gear that they would do that. And
1:41:13
Speaker 2: they've you know, they've they've made the games a lot,
1:41:17
Speaker 2: uh at least regular season games a lot shorter, and
1:41:20
Speaker 2: it's a they've they've done a lot to sort of
1:41:22
Speaker 2: try to modernize it. But that that legacy of media
1:41:25
Speaker 2: is it is kind of fascinating to me.
1:41:28
Speaker 1: Let's talk about this journalism issue in sports. I was
1:41:32
Speaker 1: with one of the people that are an executive for
1:41:35
Speaker 1: Metal Arc and they were talking about and they were
1:41:38
Speaker 1: I was on a panel with him Themill cabout you,
1:41:41
Speaker 1: and he was talking about the success that Pablo Torre
1:41:46
Speaker 1: has had and that it would have been harder for
1:41:50
Speaker 1: Pablo to be successful had they been a direct rights holder. Right.
1:41:54
Speaker 1: It was just sort of the the just the reality
1:41:57
Speaker 1: when you're a rights holder as a company, your journalism,
1:42:03
Speaker 1: your news division pays a price, whether intentional or not.
1:42:09
Speaker 1: How have you observed this and watched.
1:42:11
Speaker 2: This, I've seen here's my here's my honest answer. I
1:42:19
Speaker 2: just don't know. Because let's take ESPN for example, Don
1:42:23
Speaker 2: Van Nada is uh, you know, a fantastic writer, and
1:42:28
Speaker 2: he's one that every every ESPN or every ESPN president
1:42:32
Speaker 2: always points to.
1:42:33
Speaker 1: To say, you care about travel.
1:42:36
Speaker 2: Well, they just hired a bunch of people, you know
1:42:38
Speaker 2: Ben Strauss and and uh, you know Seth Wickersham, and
1:42:42
Speaker 2: they write. They write stories that that the leagues don't like,
1:42:47
Speaker 2: uh necessarily and so that they don't have a ton
1:42:51
Speaker 2: but they do have them, and they do do it.
1:42:53
Speaker 2: And what I've been looking at is where do they
1:42:56
Speaker 2: put it? And I think they treat Don pretty well.
1:42:58
Speaker 2: They put him on.
1:42:59
Speaker 1: I think Don did well and I would make almost
1:43:01
Speaker 1: him an exception. But the fact is ESPN feels like
1:43:06
Speaker 1: they're not going to do it exposedly that the athletic
1:43:08
Speaker 1: might do.
1:43:10
Speaker 2: No, they're not going to.
1:43:11
Speaker 1: Do as many. Okay, they may do one, right and
1:43:14
Speaker 1: they may do. They're not going to tell They're not
1:43:16
Speaker 1: going to risk Don Vanatta going public and saying they
1:43:20
Speaker 1: wouldn't let me do a story. So it's sort of
1:43:22
Speaker 1: like he I think he has the reputation.
1:43:25
Speaker 2: Yeah, you know, that's sort of like the old Dick
1:43:27
Speaker 2: Eversol trick at NBC where it was like, okay, look
1:43:30
Speaker 2: We're going to talk about how bad Russia is before
1:43:32
Speaker 2: the Olympics, but we're going to have Bob Kassas do
1:43:34
Speaker 2: it between six thirty and seven on the first day,
1:43:37
Speaker 2: so then we can point and say like.
1:43:39
Speaker 1: Look, look at it, and look, you know, I know
1:43:44
Speaker 1: that trick myself, right, and I got I've I had
1:43:47
Speaker 1: some back and forth with sports when I was at
1:43:49
Speaker 1: Meet the press when we would have a big event,
1:43:51
Speaker 1: super Bowl of the Olympics, and the sports guys would
1:43:54
Speaker 1: push back on coverage and go why why you know
1:43:57
Speaker 1: I'll never forget on one conversation I had with an
1:44:00
Speaker 1: NBC sports executive who said, why do you guys only
1:44:02
Speaker 1: care about gay rights the two weeks that I'm here
1:44:04
Speaker 1: in soaching and You're like, you know, I have to
1:44:13
Speaker 1: put on this event. You know, I've got a business today.
1:44:16
Speaker 1: And here's the thing. I respect that. Okay, I get it.
1:44:20
Speaker 1: You've got a deal and you're dealing with this host country,
1:44:23
Speaker 1: and you know, yeah, it's you have a ninety five
1:44:26
Speaker 1: percent chance of not being thrown at a Google log,
1:44:28
Speaker 1: but you know there's like a five percent chance you
1:44:30
Speaker 1: could right it is putin right, This isn't a legitimate
1:44:33
Speaker 1: figure you're dealing with. So I understand the intellectual pushback
1:44:37
Speaker 1: that way a little bit. But when I said to him,
1:44:40
Speaker 1: it's like, you know, it's sort of like, why why
1:44:42
Speaker 1: do you rob banks? That's where the money is. Why
1:44:44
Speaker 1: are we talking about ru mean, it's because it's where
1:44:46
Speaker 1: the world is focused. And something like gay rights is
1:44:50
Speaker 1: something that you yeah, they want to be an international
1:44:54
Speaker 1: a host. Well people need to know. They're not very
1:44:57
Speaker 1: welcoming right uncertainty to certain people. So but you know,
1:45:03
Speaker 1: it does this stuff does create tension that these days
1:45:07
Speaker 1: because the news divisions bring in no money, news divisions
1:45:10
Speaker 1: lose these arguments left and right.
1:45:12
Speaker 2: M Yeah, I do think that ESPN really under Steve
1:45:18
Speaker 2: Bornstein and George Bodenheimer, if you want to go way back,
1:45:21
Speaker 2: you know, really started to focus on on UH on
1:45:24
Speaker 2: building up ESPN News, and of course under John Skipper
1:45:27
Speaker 2: he made it a point to to do it.
1:45:31
Speaker 1: With the Metal Arc help founded in part by Skipper.
1:45:35
Speaker 2: Exactly, if you if you talk to Jimmy Pittaro, who
1:45:38
Speaker 2: is the current head of ESPN, he doesn't want to
1:45:42
Speaker 2: be the person that kills journalism at ESPN, and.
1:45:46
Speaker 1: So he does. Nobody wants to be that executive John.
1:45:49
Speaker 2: And so so that that also kind of plays into
1:45:51
Speaker 2: it too. I do wonder. I don't. I don't. I've
1:45:54
Speaker 2: never worked for ESPN. I've ever written written for ESPN.
1:45:57
Speaker 2: I would imagine though, as a reporter, you kind to
1:46:00
Speaker 2: know the where the third rail is and you kind
1:46:03
Speaker 2: of you know, you can walk up to it, but
1:46:06
Speaker 2: you you know, and how much does it does that
1:46:08
Speaker 2: mute you sort of at the reporter level, or at
1:46:11
Speaker 2: the managing editor level, or you know that you know
1:46:14
Speaker 2: several runs below.
1:46:16
Speaker 1: You know, the worst censorship is usually it's funny you
1:46:19
Speaker 1: bring it up that way. I always said the worst
1:46:21
Speaker 1: censorship sometimes self censorship. You know. My advice to people
1:46:24
Speaker 1: that work and are worried about it is push until
1:46:28
Speaker 1: they say no, push until they push back. Don't assume
1:46:31
Speaker 1: it to know, right, because then you're self censoring. Right
1:46:35
Speaker 1: then you're you're, you're you're almost you're you're you're dooming
1:46:37
Speaker 1: yourself before you get there.
1:46:41
Speaker 2: But you know, you also brought up pabulatory. I had
1:46:43
Speaker 2: Pablo on my pod a while back, and one of
1:46:46
Speaker 2: the things I was like, you know, I think that
1:46:49
Speaker 2: there are people at the New York Times and established
1:46:52
Speaker 2: media places that were like that story that he did
1:46:55
Speaker 2: on the Clippers, which is look as a story of
1:46:58
Speaker 2: a journalist dreams it is creating change, it's creating you know,
1:47:02
Speaker 2: and and and he was out in front of it.
1:47:05
Speaker 2: Even Paba would say, like he didn't have it sort
1:47:07
Speaker 2: of nailed down enough to be published by the Gray Lady, he.
1:47:10
Speaker 1: Wouldn't have been able to go in right away. Yes,
1:47:12
Speaker 1: now it's look, I think that I do think that
1:47:19
Speaker 1: journalism is certainly we're all everything is evolving, open source reporting, reporting,
1:47:26
Speaker 1: ash you go broadcasting it, you know, imagine writing a
1:47:30
Speaker 1: book and have it and publishing it a chapter at
1:47:33
Speaker 1: a time, right, Neil Charles Dickens days like in someone
1:47:36
Speaker 1: you know. And in some ways that that may be
1:47:38
Speaker 1: sort of how I think that's how they approach it,
1:47:42
Speaker 1: you know, because there is some sense of if you
1:47:44
Speaker 1: go out there, you'll get suddenly it will shake the
1:47:48
Speaker 1: tree a little bit, and then suddenly you'll get a
1:47:51
Speaker 1: couple more sources. Right, I mean, what's the less That's
1:47:53
Speaker 1: one of the lessons we learned from all the presidents
1:47:55
Speaker 1: met Right, It's one of the lessons they tell you
1:47:57
Speaker 1: in the movie. Essentially you got this wrong and it
1:48:00
Speaker 1: smoked out another source that actually gave you more than
1:48:03
Speaker 1: you ever thought you had. And so there's nothing you
1:48:07
Speaker 1: know to me when you're trying to find the truth.
1:48:10
Speaker 1: You know, whether you're an investigator or whether you're a reporter,
1:48:13
Speaker 1: some of the tactics are very similar that yeah, smoke stuff.
1:48:18
Speaker 2: Invite people to complain about my story because it leads
1:48:20
Speaker 2: to another story, like.
1:48:22
Speaker 1: Exactly, yeah, please, Corrections and complaints have always been the
1:48:26
Speaker 1: best source building I've ever had, no doubt. I let's
1:48:33
Speaker 1: I want to pivot here a little bit too, Sports culture, politics, right,
1:48:40
Speaker 1: that sort of nexus. And I had a conversation with
1:48:45
Speaker 1: my friend who does in the sports world, Jason Page,
1:48:49
Speaker 1: and he's been you know, and I've always said, people's
1:48:54
Speaker 1: people don't like sports figures talking about politics they don't
1:48:58
Speaker 1: agree with. People love sports figures that talk about the
1:49:01
Speaker 1: politics that they agree with. They think, oh wow, what
1:49:03
Speaker 1: a smart and intellectually, you know, open minded person when
1:49:07
Speaker 1: they agree with you. Right, Like, that's sort of I
1:49:10
Speaker 1: think how we generally are on this topic. But do
1:49:16
Speaker 1: you sense our leagues more nervous about this, less nervous
1:49:21
Speaker 1: about this? Are players more mindful of this? Less mindful?
1:49:27
Speaker 1: Is there enough happened so far that we see any
1:49:29
Speaker 1: sort of new ways, this sort of half generation of
1:49:33
Speaker 1: players are handling.
1:49:34
Speaker 2: You know, I wish I could identify a trend. The
1:49:39
Speaker 2: only trend that I can identify is, you know, from
1:49:43
Speaker 2: when you started sports Missus Daily, like the end of
1:49:46
Speaker 2: the did Jordan even say that Republicans by secrets.
1:49:49
Speaker 1: She's never been able to confirm the quote itself, the
1:49:52
Speaker 1: actual quote, I think a paraphrase. But he didn't endorse
1:49:57
Speaker 1: in that Senate race between Harvey Gant, African American at
1:50:01
Speaker 1: the time mayor of Charlotte, and Jesse Holpse, who was
1:50:05
Speaker 1: iconic in his polarizing on the issue of race as
1:50:09
Speaker 1: far as some people were concerned, So it was a
1:50:12
Speaker 1: big deal and they wanted. Nineteen ninety was basically Jordan
1:50:16
Speaker 1: at the peak of his powers. Jordan does endorse Bill
1:50:19
Speaker 1: Bradley in two thousand, by the way, and he's you know,
1:50:22
Speaker 1: when he was for that brief second retirement before before
1:50:26
Speaker 1: he donned the Wizard's colors. One of my favorite little
1:50:29
Speaker 1: side projects, John is I collected Michael Jordan card's basketball
1:50:34
Speaker 1: cards in Wizards uniforms.
1:50:35
Speaker 2: Oh, that's great.
1:50:36
Speaker 1: They're cheaper to acquire, can I.
1:50:39
Speaker 2: Tell you, can I tell you. I don't want to
1:50:40
Speaker 2: get you off topic. But that was a great couple
1:50:43
Speaker 2: of years, wasn't it. Those place was filled. Yeah, we
1:50:47
Speaker 2: didn't really win a ton, but it was just fun.
1:50:49
Speaker 1: Yeah. No, right, You're like, I'm sorry, It's like, you
1:50:53
Speaker 1: know what I enjoyed. I enjoyed the Eagles about six
1:50:55
Speaker 1: months ago. Are they passed their prime?
1:50:58
Speaker 2: Yes?
1:50:58
Speaker 1: But I still enjoyed it, just like Michael Jordan. Was
1:51:01
Speaker 1: he past this pride?
1:51:02
Speaker 2: Yes?
1:51:02
Speaker 1: Was it kind of chunky Michael Jordan?
1:51:04
Speaker 2: Guess what he's the don henl.
1:51:07
Speaker 1: I like that I enjoined a little chunky Michael Jordan
1:51:10
Speaker 1: because it was still more Michael Jordan than we ever got.
1:51:16
Speaker 1: But no Jordan. You know, look, and I've always thought
1:51:18
Speaker 1: the eight I've always thought that was generational. I've got
1:51:21
Speaker 1: a theory on that, right, is that Jordan magic? They
1:51:25
Speaker 1: were this sort of they were the first star players
1:51:28
Speaker 1: post civil rights movement, Okay, And there was a total
1:51:33
Speaker 1: business retreat by that class of African American athlete. Eighties
1:51:38
Speaker 1: nineties African American athlete was all about. When they were
1:51:43
Speaker 1: it was almost collectively, we're here to make business deals. Magic,
1:51:48
Speaker 1: mister businessman, right, Shack was a business guy, Michael. We
1:51:52
Speaker 1: went at that generation, the generation just after the civil
1:51:55
Speaker 1: rights right, Jim Brown, Muhammad Ali Kareem, you know, those
1:51:58
Speaker 1: were super active of this, and to me, Jordan was
1:52:04
Speaker 1: sort of part of that generation. It was like, you
1:52:05
Speaker 1: know what, no, no, we're not I'm not doing politics for now.
1:52:08
Speaker 1: I've got a business that I put together and thought
1:52:11
Speaker 1: that gets separated. And now I would argue we're now
1:52:14
Speaker 1: in a generation of athletes that are sort of looked
1:52:17
Speaker 1: more like the athletes of the sixties and seventies than
1:52:20
Speaker 1: the athletes of the eighties and nineties.
1:52:22
Speaker 2: Yeah, that are more prone to and you also have
1:52:26
Speaker 2: It's so tough for me to talk about this during
1:52:30
Speaker 2: the Trump era because Trump is so polarizing and he's.
1:52:34
Speaker 1: Inserted, he inserts himself into so many of our sports
1:52:37
Speaker 1: and cultural events that even if you don't want to
1:52:40
Speaker 1: mix politics, it's done for you whether you want it
1:52:43
Speaker 1: or not.
1:52:44
Speaker 2: And so that that UFC a fight, a fight that
1:52:46
Speaker 2: was on the White House lawn, got bonkers numbers, Chuck like,
1:52:52
Speaker 2: it did really really well the US. It was the
1:52:56
Speaker 2: USA match against Belgium. After he got involved with it
1:53:00
Speaker 2: with the red card. You set a record for viewership.
1:53:04
Speaker 2: It was going to be big anyway because it was
1:53:06
Speaker 2: a World Cup in the last sixteen But he didn't
1:53:10
Speaker 2: depress people from watching it people. I mean, in fact,
1:53:13
Speaker 2: you could argue possibly more people ended up watching it
1:53:16
Speaker 2: as well. So you are seeing like we're just in
1:53:19
Speaker 2: a point where like he's inserting himself into into more
1:53:23
Speaker 2: this this Uh in d C, they're going to have
1:53:25
Speaker 2: the IndyCar race going around the Capitol up and down,
1:53:29
Speaker 2: you know, Independence Avenue. I bet you that gets like
1:53:34
Speaker 2: such records for IndyCar in terms of in terms of
1:53:37
Speaker 2: a TV audience. So you know there there is a
1:53:41
Speaker 2: certain megaphone that's coming from it on the other side
1:53:43
Speaker 2: as well.
1:53:54
Speaker 1: Hey, polarization has been good for the attention of common
1:53:57
Speaker 1: that doesn't mean it's been good for society, right, the
1:54:03
Speaker 1: attention economy.
1:54:04
Speaker 2: I mean, I just want to say I was strictly
1:54:06
Speaker 2: talking about television rating.
1:54:08
Speaker 1: No, you're not wrong. I mean, look, I have this
1:54:11
Speaker 1: whole thesis that basically, you know, this is what we
1:54:14
Speaker 1: the incorrect lesson We all learned from oj the Ojson
1:54:17
Speaker 1: coverage of O. J. Simpson when the decision, it was
1:54:20
Speaker 1: the first time a major news story was covered because
1:54:24
Speaker 1: that's what the public wanted, rather than that's what the
1:54:26
Speaker 1: journalists wanted. And we've never stopped. We really never stopped
1:54:31
Speaker 1: since then. And you could argue the attention economy of today.
1:54:35
Speaker 1: The building blocks were built by OJ and Robert Kardashian, right,
1:54:41
Speaker 1: you know, And my.
1:54:43
Speaker 2: Newsroom we all crowded into the one room that had
1:54:46
Speaker 2: a television set and watched it is it is.
1:54:53
Speaker 1: It is funny to see where we were and to
1:54:54
Speaker 1: see where we are on that thing. Well, I say
1:55:00
Speaker 1: it's because and I'm doing. I have a fun little
1:55:02
Speaker 1: list that I did last episode about five active players
1:55:08
Speaker 1: who I think would be pretty good politicians, and my
1:55:14
Speaker 1: number one is Kaitlyn Clark. And my rationale for her is,
1:55:19
Speaker 1: I think it's remarkable how much she has kept her cool,
1:55:25
Speaker 1: how much she is not for somebody that is pulled
1:55:30
Speaker 1: into all sorts of culture war debates, and she does
1:55:36
Speaker 1: not budge, right, she doesn't ever give it oxygen, and
1:55:41
Speaker 1: yet it's still there. Anyway. I think what's happening to
1:55:46
Speaker 1: her is it's just it's very difficult. She's going through something.
1:55:49
Speaker 1: And I look, yes, she's got millions of dollars, so
1:55:52
Speaker 1: I'm not going to sit here and say, woe is
1:55:54
Speaker 1: Caitlin Clark. But there's something that you know, there's a
1:55:58
Speaker 1: joylessness to this that's really it's really sad to watch,
1:56:03
Speaker 1: but I am impressed with how she seems to me.
1:56:05
Speaker 2: Let me ask you a quick question about it.
1:56:07
Speaker 1: But I'm curious what you how you're covering this?
1:56:10
Speaker 2: How would you how would you how do you remember?
1:56:15
Speaker 2: You know U a comparable like sort of a white
1:56:18
Speaker 2: athlete going into into a blacksport, like Larry Bird coming in,
1:56:21
Speaker 2: you know, and there was a focus on him, and
1:56:25
Speaker 2: that was when the ending was. It was very physical.
1:56:29
Speaker 1: There was and I think there's look, I kind of
1:56:31
Speaker 1: I enjoyed w NBA right now more than the regular
1:56:34
Speaker 1: NBA because it's a little bit more physical, because it's
1:56:37
Speaker 1: a more they play at the rim a little bit more, right,
1:56:41
Speaker 1: it's a it's a it's the game that you and I,
1:56:43
Speaker 1: you and I grew up with in the eighties and
1:56:45
Speaker 1: nineties more than the than the NBA game. So I
1:56:48
Speaker 1: I like, I enjoy that style because it's the style
1:56:54
Speaker 1: that my formative years. So I think there's certainly something
1:56:56
Speaker 1: to that, but I think it's more of the you know,
1:56:59
Speaker 1: trying to be used as a symbol. And I agree
1:57:01
Speaker 1: with you. Larry Bird wouldn't. He was very He just
1:57:04
Speaker 1: never gave anybody. People wanted to create a race fight
1:57:07
Speaker 1: between him and Magic and it just the two of
1:57:09
Speaker 1: them weren't going to let it happen. They just never
1:57:12
Speaker 1: were going to let it happen. And obviously no social media.
1:57:16
Speaker 1: Who knows right? You know, Bird was known to have
1:57:19
Speaker 1: a short fuse himself, so who knows right? In the
1:57:22
Speaker 1: era of social media fan empowerment. You know, we've talked
1:57:25
Speaker 1: about the player empowerment area. I'd argue we have a
1:57:28
Speaker 1: fan empowerment era when it comes to thinking what you
1:57:30
Speaker 1: can tell an athlete they say or do. But it's
1:57:35
Speaker 1: an interesting it's a fair it's a fair argument.
1:57:39
Speaker 2: I will say this. I was just on a panel
1:57:40
Speaker 2: with Christine Brennan, who wrote a book about Kaylen Clark,
1:57:43
Speaker 2: and sure enough, Kaylan did not work with Christina in
1:57:49
Speaker 2: the book.
1:57:50
Speaker 1: She is not proactively to me, at least it doesn't appear,
1:57:55
Speaker 1: maybe you know, different to worry about shaping this or
1:57:58
Speaker 1: shaping that, are all of that, Like she just seems
1:58:01
Speaker 1: to try to be like I just want to play basketball.
1:58:03
Speaker 1: I enjoy it.
1:58:04
Speaker 2: Yeah, and I'm probably channeling Christine here, but her popular.
1:58:08
Speaker 2: She is so popular, and she was popular and when
1:58:12
Speaker 2: she was in imagine this, when she was in college.
1:58:16
Speaker 2: The final of the women's Final four got more viewers
1:58:19
Speaker 2: than the final of the men's Final four, which had
1:58:22
Speaker 2: never happened before and hasn't happened since and probably won't
1:58:25
Speaker 2: happen for another decade at least if then. And there's
1:58:30
Speaker 2: a so the story that I'm that I'm watching cover
1:58:33
Speaker 2: the business and the celebrity of it a little bit,
1:58:35
Speaker 2: but it doesn't seem like the NBA of the w
1:58:38
Speaker 2: n b A is doing enough to sort of to
1:58:43
Speaker 2: help the just to not to help Kitlin Clark out
1:58:47
Speaker 2: or I call the fouls just there's undeniable popularity there,
1:58:51
Speaker 2: like use it like it's only going to be here
1:58:54
Speaker 2: for a little bit, right, did you read that?
1:58:57
Speaker 1: I'm like, I can't believe the story. A couple of
1:59:00
Speaker 1: weeks ago, I think it was you know, I'm here
1:59:04
Speaker 1: given ESPN grief, and I think it was a good
1:59:06
Speaker 1: ESPN story. It was a business story about the launch
1:59:08
Speaker 1: of Nike, Nike finally launching a Caitlin clarkship and I'm
1:59:13
Speaker 1: letting her going, wait, what were and they kept done
1:59:16
Speaker 1: that in Iowa.
1:59:17
Speaker 2: They're getting nil in college right now, so I mean,
1:59:20
Speaker 2: what is Nike?
1:59:20
Speaker 1: And then I was you know, it was funny. It
1:59:22
Speaker 1: was to me a reminder of how company's atrophy. And
1:59:26
Speaker 1: here's Nike, who used to be this incredibly nimble company,
1:59:29
Speaker 1: you know, would be would take a few risks every
1:59:32
Speaker 1: now and then, you know, with their athletes, and would
1:59:34
Speaker 1: always lean in very player focus, very athlete focused. And
1:59:39
Speaker 1: everything I learned from that piece seemed to be that
1:59:41
Speaker 1: there was a lot of bureaucracy behind the scenes that
1:59:44
Speaker 1: kept preventing them from getting their clerk shoe out. And
1:59:47
Speaker 1: you're like, you literally had the greatest moment this generation
1:59:52
Speaker 1: for women's basketball, and you have you'd literally let let
1:59:57
Speaker 1: the moment pass, you miss you know, your opportunity to
2:00:04
Speaker 1: make it. These probably the most popular shoe as a
2:00:07
Speaker 1: as a holiday gift they you know, had they launched
2:00:10
Speaker 1: it the year you know, she she turns pro just
2:00:13
Speaker 1: as it's it's been strange to watch Nike handle her
2:00:16
Speaker 1: and strange to watch the w n b A normally
2:00:19
Speaker 1: and who it's still run by the NBA, right and.
2:00:24
Speaker 2: There market and you go back to you were talking
2:00:26
Speaker 2: about Jordan at the height of his powers, or like
2:00:29
Speaker 2: Magic and Bird. The NBA, David Stern, they pushed that
2:00:34
Speaker 2: out there, that was that wasn't just part part of
2:00:36
Speaker 2: a network marketing. That was part of the league marketing
2:00:39
Speaker 2: to get that out there. But but the the the
2:00:42
Speaker 2: w NBA just does they seem to be shorthanding that
2:00:45
Speaker 2: a lot. And I get it.
2:00:47
Speaker 1: Look, they're afraid of creating race debates, creating debates about
2:00:52
Speaker 1: sexuality and all this, And to me, they're coming up
2:00:57
Speaker 1: with a bunch of reasons not to do something. And
2:00:59
Speaker 1: so what it looks like, it's just you see it
2:01:02
Speaker 1: in a lot of organizations when you've allowed fear of
2:01:06
Speaker 1: what could be a reaction paralyzing mm hmm. And we
2:01:11
Speaker 1: don't even know that the public will react the way
2:01:13
Speaker 1: they think, and yet they're behaving as if they're just fearful. Yeah.
2:01:18
Speaker 2: And in Kathy Engelbert's defense, I suspect the public will
2:01:21
Speaker 2: react as she expects. You know, there's going to be
2:01:23
Speaker 2: a segment that this is the great segment.
2:01:26
Speaker 1: Is she the right person in this moment?
2:01:29
Speaker 2: I'm a I'm a Kathy fan. I think I think
2:01:32
Speaker 2: she's done and she comes in from the business side
2:01:34
Speaker 2: of things, and I the w n B a as
2:01:36
Speaker 2: uh has grown a ton, she obviously does have some
2:01:41
Speaker 2: problems with relationships with with the players and and with a.
2:01:45
Speaker 1: You know, I'm gonna spit all an idea here, Johnny,
2:01:47
Speaker 1: and you can say typical like I'm just you know,
2:01:51
Speaker 1: literally Peanut Gallery. How about Cheryl Miller's deputy commission I
2:01:58
Speaker 1: think that.
2:01:59
Speaker 2: If you've got somebody else in there, like that.
2:02:01
Speaker 1: Big name like that, who's a foundational you know, thought
2:02:06
Speaker 1: of as almost like a foundational Mount Rushmore women's player,
2:02:10
Speaker 1: huge respect across racial lines, across generational lines, just seems
2:02:17
Speaker 1: to me they need somebody that can.
2:02:21
Speaker 2: Because the player's view of Kathy Engelbert is not going
2:02:24
Speaker 2: to change at all. But the idea that people boot Kathy,
2:02:27
Speaker 2: and people boot David Stern, they boot Adam Silver, they
2:02:30
Speaker 2: do each.
2:02:31
Speaker 1: One of those commissioners found somebody to become the liaison
2:02:35
Speaker 1: to the world exactly. Yes, okay, And that's what I'm
2:02:38
Speaker 1: wondering here. I mean, like I said, and.
2:02:40
Speaker 2: I think everything we're talking about is a w NBA
2:02:42
Speaker 2: needing to become like a you know, a big girl league,
2:02:44
Speaker 2: you know, And it's not sort of like still drafting
2:02:48
Speaker 2: in the wake of the of the NBA in a
2:02:50
Speaker 2: lot of ways.
2:02:52
Speaker 1: All right, last topic, I want to hit with you
2:02:55
Speaker 1: before before we land this plane. So, the perception among
2:02:59
Speaker 1: college fool all fanatics like myself are that BOX and
2:03:03
Speaker 1: ESPN have as much influence on the Big Ten and
2:03:06
Speaker 1: the SEC and their decision making process, uh as anyone.
2:03:12
Speaker 1: How exaggerated of a claim is that. How fair of
2:03:14
Speaker 1: a claim.
2:03:15
Speaker 2: Is at I don't think it's a fair claim. However,
2:03:20
Speaker 2: I however, Eric Shanks and and Jimmy Patarro are two
2:03:25
Speaker 2: of the most powerful people in college so so yeah,
2:03:31
Speaker 2: but I think so that's I kind of agree and
2:03:34
Speaker 2: kind of kind kind of disagree. But everything, that's everything
2:03:38
Speaker 2: that's running through DC right now with the with the
2:03:42
Speaker 2: college sports, I don't see the fingerprints of the of
2:03:45
Speaker 2: the networks on that. I do think they're lobbying the
2:03:49
Speaker 2: SEC and the and Tony Titi and Greg Yankee to
2:03:52
Speaker 2: you know, to do whatever they they need to do.
2:03:55
Speaker 1: Have you been? I have zero confidence this bill is
2:03:58
Speaker 1: going to pass.
2:03:59
Speaker 2: Oh, people that I know in DC that that do
2:04:03
Speaker 2: this for a living, give it a single digit percent
2:04:06
Speaker 2: of passing. I mean before before midterm elections. This is
2:04:10
Speaker 2: your world more than mine. But before midterm elections, like,
2:04:13
Speaker 2: nobody's going to do anything that can help the Trump administration.
2:04:17
Speaker 1: Right, and you're also not gonna in some ways, the
2:04:21
Speaker 1: closer we get to the start of college football season,
2:04:24
Speaker 1: the harder it is to get.
2:04:25
Speaker 2: I was told maybe the lame duck, but again the.
2:04:28
Speaker 1: Lane you know more about this in a place where
2:04:30
Speaker 1: you would do this. You're got to mess with the
2:04:32
Speaker 1: Sports Broadcasting Act all of that. That is a a
2:04:35
Speaker 1: classic shove it into December. But I just don't buy
2:04:41
Speaker 1: that anything can be that Congress will will be able
2:04:47
Speaker 1: to have anything to pass muster in the courts without
2:04:48
Speaker 1: collective bargaining. Well, I feel is inevitable. We got to
2:04:52
Speaker 1: have collective bargaining. The question I have is is it
2:04:55
Speaker 1: by conference or is it by division? Is it simply
2:05:00
Speaker 1: by the Are you or just any NCAA athlete can
2:05:05
Speaker 1: be like That's the question I have on collective bargaining
2:05:09
Speaker 1: is where do you organize it? Is it organized on
2:05:12
Speaker 1: the division level? Is it organized on the conference? When
2:05:15
Speaker 1: I mean Division FBS, right, the Football Subdivision, the Division
2:05:19
Speaker 1: one side? Whatever? But I do know that you know
2:05:25
Speaker 1: labor those those that are friendly with labor. John are
2:05:30
Speaker 1: the senators the most adamant against this deal?
2:05:33
Speaker 2: Yeah yeah, And a lot of a lot of the
2:05:36
Speaker 2: schools in the Big ten in the SEC are against it.
2:05:39
Speaker 2: So I can't imagine the senators in those states will
2:05:43
Speaker 2: be supporting it as well. But in terms of like
2:05:49
Speaker 2: how to do it, like the key is unfortunately for
2:05:53
Speaker 2: your acc like the Big ten in the SEC, like
2:05:55
Speaker 2: like if something comes that they don't like, like I
2:05:58
Speaker 2: could see either of them just or both of them
2:06:01
Speaker 2: together just you know what, we'll do the Super League
2:06:03
Speaker 2: that everybody's been talking about, and and and come come
2:06:07
Speaker 2: away from the NC Double A or the FBS or
2:06:09
Speaker 2: well ever you want to call it.
2:06:11
Speaker 1: I mean, what's really frustrated me here is that it
2:06:13
Speaker 1: is to me in ESPN and Fox's best interest not
2:06:16
Speaker 1: to allow the media rights to be collectively bargained, because
2:06:20
Speaker 1: if they're ever collectively bargained, they will get more money.
2:06:23
Speaker 1: Look at the NFL we are.
2:06:25
Speaker 2: I'm going to push back on this though, because like
2:06:27
Speaker 2: I'll look at the NFL, we would like our first.
2:06:29
Speaker 2: The first thing we talked about is how all these
2:06:31
Speaker 2: companies are now going to be cutting costs and cutting.
2:06:33
Speaker 1: Costs, and football is one of those. Look, I think
2:06:39
Speaker 1: that Colorado's I look at it this way, the Colorado
2:06:44
Speaker 1: States the world, the Iowa States of the world. Pretty
2:06:47
Speaker 1: much any any school with state and their names seems
2:06:50
Speaker 1: to be screwed these days, right, you know, whether you
2:06:54
Speaker 1: were like in the in the Big Twelve Pact whatever
2:06:57
Speaker 1: whatever we're calling the pack, the back twelve is A
2:06:59
Speaker 1: is A is all the states I think in the
2:07:02
Speaker 1: state at the end of the year aim to get in.
2:07:05
Speaker 2: But stealing that line, I like that it is.
2:07:09
Speaker 1: The fact is if if you, you know, made the
2:07:13
Speaker 1: price to get your Alabama Georgia game meant you had
2:07:15
Speaker 1: to like share some revenue with the with Washington State,
2:07:19
Speaker 1: you know, because if you if you did this the
2:07:22
Speaker 1: way if the NFL did it by division, nobody would
2:07:26
Speaker 1: air Jacksonville Jaguar Daans, Right, And so I do believe
2:07:31
Speaker 1: this system punishes hurts college football's ability to expand beyond
2:07:37
Speaker 1: being super popular in two big regions of the country.
2:07:41
Speaker 2: The UH I would argue, it's super popular across the country.
2:07:45
Speaker 2: I mean, it's a number.
2:07:46
Speaker 1: Still regardless, it's still popular and they're and they're doing
2:07:49
Speaker 1: their damn nest here to screw it up by trying
2:07:53
Speaker 1: to put a velvet rope around the sport.
2:07:55
Speaker 2: So that's going to help, that's going to help Washington State.
2:07:57
Speaker 2: Why would it help Alabama or why would it help you?
2:08:01
Speaker 2: Because they're they're already like the Big Ten right now.
2:08:03
Speaker 1: Because it's because guess what does it hurt the Dallas
2:08:06
Speaker 1: Cowboys Now? Datas Cowboys could make more money if they
2:08:10
Speaker 1: could just sell their own media rights. Why do they
2:08:12
Speaker 1: even bother being in with the NFL.
2:08:14
Speaker 2: So if I'm if I'm say Ohio State, I'm already
2:08:17
Speaker 2: subsidizing Rutgers in Maryland and Minnesota and like like I
2:08:22
Speaker 2: already have them within within you have to be.
2:08:24
Speaker 1: Able to make a schedule like you know, I mean,
2:08:28
Speaker 1: it is like I at some point I don't want
2:08:31
Speaker 1: to see Alabama and Georgia three times a year and
2:08:35
Speaker 1: and and that is a That is the direction I
2:08:40
Speaker 1: think Sanke wants to go, is that he thinks that, look,
2:08:44
Speaker 1: let's go super League and we will have you know,
2:08:46
Speaker 1: and look, I see Miami will be in the Super League.
2:08:51
Speaker 1: So I'm not worried about Miami in this case because
2:08:55
Speaker 1: the market matters too much. It has a good brand,
2:08:58
Speaker 1: but it doesn't mean it's right, and it doesn't mean
2:09:01
Speaker 1: that that's I mean the best part of college football
2:09:05
Speaker 1: is that you can get one hundred thousand people in
2:09:07
Speaker 1: the middle of nowhere in Center College, in State College,
2:09:11
Speaker 1: in Center Pennsvane.
2:09:13
Speaker 2: I listen way too too much and way too frequently
2:09:16
Speaker 2: to media executives and they say, like, like, you know,
2:09:20
Speaker 2: if you add in like what they pay for is Michigan,
2:09:23
Speaker 2: Ohio State, if you want to add in Washington State
2:09:25
Speaker 2: and everything else, I know it isn't necessarily going up.
2:09:28
Speaker 2: They're just gonna shoot there. They're gonna end up dividing
2:09:31
Speaker 2: what we what we already pay because like we were
2:09:34
Speaker 2: cutting costs.
2:09:36
Speaker 1: There just becomes a point though then okay, you'll make
2:09:40
Speaker 1: it where you don't even have enough teams to field,
2:09:44
Speaker 1: you know, And that's I don't know if we're going
2:09:47
Speaker 1: to love that competitive in balance.
2:09:51
Speaker 2: Oh I as a Maryland guy, I hate it. I
2:09:54
Speaker 2: want to play West Virginia every year. I want to
2:09:56
Speaker 2: play Virginia every year. I want to play Penn State
2:09:58
Speaker 2: every I don't need to go play Washington up and
2:10:02
Speaker 2: watch the team like travel like six hours to go
2:10:05
Speaker 2: and you know, lose by thirty.
2:10:08
Speaker 1: Well, let me ask you this, speaking of Maryland and
2:10:10
Speaker 1: sort of the fact that there are two classes in
2:10:13
Speaker 1: the Big Ten, maybe there's three tiers in the Big Ten.
2:10:15
Speaker 1: I don't know where your head is at on this,
2:10:16
Speaker 1: but I do wonder, which is why Michigan and USC
2:10:22
Speaker 1: vetoed that private equity deal. But you know, I am
2:10:27
Speaker 1: waiting for Alabama to say why why does Mississippi State
2:10:30
Speaker 1: get an equal share of the media revenue? And I'm
2:10:33
Speaker 1: waiting for, you know, the same thing to be said
2:10:35
Speaker 1: about Purdue in the Big Ten and frankly, maybe even
2:10:38
Speaker 1: Maryland or Rutgers. What happens when that begins? Is it
2:10:44
Speaker 1: going to be sort of this sort of Darwinistic you know,
2:10:48
Speaker 1: is that the end of the Big Conference?
2:10:51
Speaker 2: You know, in baseball we're talking about the salary cap,
2:10:54
Speaker 2: and you can't do a salary cap without the salary floor.
2:10:58
Speaker 1: Yeah.
2:10:58
Speaker 2: I don't know when this is going to happen, but
2:11:00
Speaker 2: I've always suspected that in the college conferences that, uh,
2:11:05
Speaker 2: you know, if you're not spending enough, if you know,
2:11:09
Speaker 2: to field a competitive football team. And this is all
2:11:13
Speaker 2: about football, because the New Americans, of course great at basketball,
2:11:15
Speaker 2: come on, chuck, But but if you're not spending enough
2:11:19
Speaker 2: to be a good at football. Teams are leaving conferences
2:11:24
Speaker 2: to go to other conferences. Conferences want to have the
2:11:28
Speaker 2: authority to kick kick some teams out if they're not coming.
2:11:31
Speaker 2: So is it is it giving them less of the
2:11:34
Speaker 2: media revenue or is it about kicking them out and
2:11:36
Speaker 2: adding in somebody else that'll be that'll spend money and
2:11:39
Speaker 2: be more competitive. I don't know.
2:11:41
Speaker 1: Here's how sache and and and these guys could win
2:11:43
Speaker 1: me over. Go to relegation.
2:11:47
Speaker 2: By the way, relegation, I lived in London for about
2:11:49
Speaker 2: four years. Relegation is so great. It would be great
2:11:52
Speaker 2: in every sport. I want to see relegation. I want
2:11:56
Speaker 2: to see it in baseball. I want to see it totally.
2:12:00
Speaker 1: Already full fledged socialism. So there's really no like the
2:12:04
Speaker 1: NFL is weirdly immune from this, but because the way
2:12:07
Speaker 1: they're system. But for those with looser per strings, relegation.
2:12:11
Speaker 2: Would be nice and like as two of the few
2:12:14
Speaker 2: Wizards fans in town like relegated, we we would be
2:12:16
Speaker 2: like in the C division, I think there's relegation.
2:12:20
Speaker 1: Let me let me get you out of here on that. Actually,
2:12:25
Speaker 1: is it just mirrored as the NBA does not call
2:12:27
Speaker 1: I've always thought Washington. There are two basketball two cities
2:12:32
Speaker 1: that should be the basketball capital outside of New York
2:12:36
Speaker 1: and LA. Okay, New York and LA are separate deals,
2:12:39
Speaker 1: and obviously Boston has this history. Atlanta and DC are
2:12:45
Speaker 1: two NBA markets that we all this is you know
2:12:49
Speaker 1: they you know, two of the wealthiest majority African American
2:12:53
Speaker 1: counties in the country are in both of those markets.
2:12:56
Speaker 1: This and yet the two franchises that have been struggling
2:13:03
Speaker 1: in markets where if they ever got going, I think
2:13:07
Speaker 1: they would be juggernauts. It's sort of the what people
2:13:09
Speaker 1: talk about with Arizona State and college football. Boy, if
2:13:12
Speaker 1: they ever figure it out, watch out right, Like Phoenix,
2:13:15
Speaker 1: that's a that's a hot bed. What's your sense does
2:13:19
Speaker 1: the NBA do they should they be helping those two
2:13:23
Speaker 1: franchises be better at those because they should be bigger
2:13:26
Speaker 1: and better markets than they are.
2:13:28
Speaker 2: All Right, you know what, I'm going to answer this
2:13:29
Speaker 2: as a fan as opposed to like a sports business reporter.
2:13:32
Speaker 2: But the team in the NBA with the worst record
2:13:37
Speaker 2: since two thousand, it's not the Sacramento Kings', it's the
2:13:43
Speaker 2: Washington Wizards.
2:13:44
Speaker 1: It's lunch. By the way, is it like, do we
2:13:46
Speaker 1: have like a ten game lead.
2:13:47
Speaker 2: I mean, you know, I think Sacramento is seconds about
2:13:52
Speaker 2: four or five games. I think we're going to dominate
2:13:54
Speaker 2: them this year. Yeah, but I don't know.
2:13:57
Speaker 1: I'm all in.
2:13:58
Speaker 2: Look, I grew up here. I still go to high
2:14:01
Speaker 2: school games where you pay five dollars and you see,
2:14:03
Speaker 2: you know, college level players.
2:14:05
Speaker 1: You know, one of the best high school recruiting hotbeds.
2:14:08
Speaker 1: And the I mean the mid Atlantic Catholic schools, Geese,
2:14:12
Speaker 1: I mean, you.
2:14:12
Speaker 2: Know, and then they haven't been great recently, but Maryland,
2:14:17
Speaker 2: Georgetown you have some like premier Division I college basketball programs,
2:14:22
Speaker 2: and like I'm old enough to remember seventy eight and
2:14:25
Speaker 2: they had parades and you know, people were going to
2:14:28
Speaker 2: annic over them. The John Wall years, we didn't quite
2:14:31
Speaker 2: get to make the conference finals.
2:14:33
Speaker 1: That game six, baby, but it was exciting. It was,
2:14:36
Speaker 1: I said, until the Nats won the World Series the
2:14:39
Speaker 1: next year. It was the most exciting sporting event I
2:14:41
Speaker 1: had ever attended in Washington.
2:14:43
Speaker 2: Yeah, isn't that sad victory like not even a semi final, quarter.
2:14:48
Speaker 1: A conference final, I know, but it was. It was
2:14:51
Speaker 1: because you hadn't had it since the old NFL days.
2:14:53
Speaker 2: And John Wall jumping up on the scorers stable for
2:14:57
Speaker 2: the game.
2:14:57
Speaker 1: Yeah that was great, Well, always have games. Don't talk
2:15:03
Speaker 1: about came seven Kelly olynnok Oh, yeah, didn't he like
2:15:08
Speaker 1: separate somebody's shoulder. Yeah, it's like, of course, like the
2:15:12
Speaker 1: one time Boston is vulnerable but God blessed the Wizards.
2:15:17
Speaker 1: But I mean it's it is one of those they
2:15:19
Speaker 1: feel like sleeping giant markets to the NBA. And that's
2:15:21
Speaker 1: why I've always been curious. Why, you know, if I
2:15:24
Speaker 1: were the NBA, i'd really be goose in those markets.
2:15:27
Speaker 2: Yeah, I don't know, sleeping giant like like Oklahoma City.
2:15:30
Speaker 2: Who would have thought they were a sleeping giant market,
2:15:32
Speaker 2: but you see that they sell out all the time
2:15:34
Speaker 2: in Cleveland. I think if the NBA is uh is
2:15:38
Speaker 2: big enough and powerful enough and has enough like star
2:15:41
Speaker 2: power that and really any market, I think it'll be
2:15:45
Speaker 2: a uh, you know, a market all right?
2:15:47
Speaker 1: Promote Where can people find your work?
2:15:49
Speaker 2: Oh? Thank you? As you said at the beginning, I'm
2:15:52
Speaker 2: the sports correspondent for Puck Puck Dot News uh and
2:15:56
Speaker 2: I am I gave up one you do twice A
2:16:00
Speaker 2: newsletter comes out twice a week, and then I do
2:16:02
Speaker 2: a podcast called The Varsity that comes out twice twice
2:16:06
Speaker 2: a week as well, coming in an interview. Podcasts a
2:16:10
Speaker 2: lot like this on Social Orano you r A and
2:16:14
Speaker 2: D underscore Puck And I'm trying to get a little
2:16:17
Speaker 2: bit more active on X. I'd gone away from it
2:16:20
Speaker 2: for a while, but I think people are still I'm
2:16:22
Speaker 2: getting a lot of engagement on there, and.
2:16:24
Speaker 1: People are still on it. Yeah, you know, the algorithm sucks,
2:16:27
Speaker 1: but you know they're still good engagement. Especially Oh, I
2:16:29
Speaker 1: just do.
2:16:30
Speaker 2: I don't do for you. I just do people I follow. Yeah,
2:16:32
Speaker 2: I never do for you.
2:16:33
Speaker 1: Yeah for a mess anyway, John, good to see you
2:16:37
Speaker 1: by friend.
2:16:38
Speaker 2: Hey, thanks, thank you so much for the invite.
2:16:50
Speaker 1: All Right, it is time machine time. Let's go back
2:16:54
Speaker 1: into the time machine. Where are we going? Ah, We're
2:16:57
Speaker 1: in July twenty eight, nineteen sixty eight. It is one
2:17:02
Speaker 1: of the least remembered anniversaries in American history. There are
2:17:05
Speaker 1: no fireworks, there's no federal holiday that marks it, there's
2:17:08
Speaker 1: not a famous painting that denotes it. Yet you could
2:17:14
Speaker 1: make a persuasive case that this is one of the
2:17:16
Speaker 1: most important dates in the life of the United States
2:17:21
Speaker 1: of America and the American Constitution itself. It was on
2:17:24
Speaker 1: this day that the then Secretary of State William Seward,
2:17:28
Speaker 1: certified the fourteenth Commendment. Now, if you've heard reconstruction described
2:17:32
Speaker 1: as America's second founding, you've encountered an idea popularized by
2:17:37
Speaker 1: historian Eric Foher, including in his book The Second Founding.
2:17:41
Speaker 1: But here's one of the stranger parts. One of the
2:17:42
Speaker 1: most consequential moments in American constitutional history nearly dissolved into
2:17:47
Speaker 1: what looked like a clerical dispute, because by July ninth,
2:17:52
Speaker 1: enough states had ratified the amendment for it to become
2:17:54
Speaker 1: part of the Constitution, provided every ratification counted. It turned
2:17:59
Speaker 1: out to be a small problem. Ohio, New Jersey had
2:18:02
Speaker 1: ratified it, then, after political control changed hands, both tried
2:18:08
Speaker 1: to withdraw their ratifications, and the question, of course, was
2:18:11
Speaker 1: could they do that? Well, the Constitution never said. Secretary
2:18:16
Speaker 1: of State Seward wasn't sure. He so on July twentieth,
2:18:19
Speaker 1: he issued a proclamation saying, in effect, if those recisions
2:18:23
Speaker 1: didn't count, then the amendment had been adopted. Well. Congress
2:18:29
Speaker 1: hated that equivocation. The next day, it declared the Amendment ratified.
2:18:34
Speaker 1: So then on July twenty eighth, Seward issued a second proclamation,
2:18:38
Speaker 1: no conditions, no ifs. The paperwork was complete. The paperwork
2:18:43
Speaker 1: was never really the story, right. The real story, of course,
2:18:46
Speaker 1: was that the Constitution was finally going to answer a
2:18:49
Speaker 1: question that Americans had been arguing about since the founding,
2:18:52
Speaker 1: which was this, who gets to be an American? And
2:18:55
Speaker 1: if that sounds like an old historical question, remember this
2:18:59
Speaker 1: just a month ago the Supreme Court was answering it again.
2:19:02
Speaker 1: And one of the things that I like to remind
2:19:05
Speaker 1: people of is, in some ways, the same fights we
2:19:08
Speaker 1: were having in the nineteenth century about who gets to
2:19:10
Speaker 1: be an American are the same fights we're having right
2:19:12
Speaker 1: now in twenty twenty six. So look, let's start with this.
2:19:16
Speaker 1: It was the question the founders left open. We often
2:19:19
Speaker 1: treat the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution as though
2:19:22
Speaker 1: they're telling the same story, which of course they didn't.
2:19:26
Speaker 1: The Declaration tells us what America believes. The Constitution tells
2:19:30
Speaker 1: us how American governs. The Constitution gave Congress the authority
2:19:34
Speaker 1: to establish a uniform rule of naturalization. Congress acted almost
2:19:40
Speaker 1: immediately the Naturalization Act of seventeen ninety limited naturalization to
2:19:45
Speaker 1: quote free white persons. So there was a federal rule
2:19:50
Speaker 1: for becoming an American. What the Constitution never clearly answered
2:19:54
Speaker 1: was something different. If you were born here, were you
2:19:57
Speaker 1: already one? That wasn't a technical question. It became one
2:20:01
Speaker 1: of the defining constitutional questions of the entire nineteenth century.
2:20:06
Speaker 1: Were free black American citizens? Did citizenship come from the
2:20:10
Speaker 1: states or did it come from the nation. In eighteen
2:20:13
Speaker 1: fifty seven, the Supreme Court supplied an answer, the infamous
2:20:17
Speaker 1: dread Scott decision. Then Chief Justice Roger Taney ruled that
2:20:20
Speaker 1: black Americans, even those born free, could not be citizens
2:20:23
Speaker 1: under the Constitution. So think about what happened next. The
2:20:28
Speaker 1: Declaration proclaimed universal principles. The Constitution had left the citizenship
2:20:33
Speaker 1: question open. Supreme Court just filled in the blank, and
2:20:36
Speaker 1: it filled it in with one of the worst constitutional
2:20:39
Speaker 1: decisions in American history because four years after that horrible decision,
2:20:44
Speaker 1: the nation went to war. So freedom was easier to
2:20:50
Speaker 1: declare than to secure. As it turns out, the Union
2:20:53
Speaker 1: won the Civil War, the constitutional crisis survived. He had
2:20:57
Speaker 1: four million formally enslaved Americans were now free. The Thirteenth
2:21:02
Speaker 1: Amendment would be ratified that December. They made a movie
2:21:06
Speaker 1: about it. You'd probably remember the Lincoln movie Some of People.
2:21:09
Speaker 1: That finally abolished slavery throughout the United States, but the
2:21:13
Speaker 1: effort to rebuild slavery's legal architecture had already begun, particularly
2:21:18
Speaker 1: in the South. Mississippi enacted the first and most sweeping
2:21:21
Speaker 1: Black code in November of eighteen sixty five. It was
2:21:25
Speaker 1: a month before the Thirteenth Amendment became officially part of
2:21:28
Speaker 1: the Constitution, and other states quickly followed that. You had
2:21:32
Speaker 1: vagrancy laws, you had these coercive labor contracts, apprenticeship systems
2:21:37
Speaker 1: that often bound black children to white employers. Different legal tools,
2:21:41
Speaker 1: but the same objective. Essentially slavery by another dame. So
2:21:45
Speaker 1: Congress saw this and they realized something. Abolishing slavery and
2:21:48
Speaker 1: securing freedom had turned out to be two different things.
2:21:51
Speaker 1: It wasn't the same thing. Freedom without citizenship was not freedom.
2:21:56
Speaker 1: Citizenship without equal protection wasn't citizenship. So Congress's first answer
2:22:02
Speaker 1: wasn't a constitutional amendment. They actually tried a statute first,
2:22:06
Speaker 1: The Civil Rights Act of eighteen sixty six, passed over
2:22:10
Speaker 1: Andrew Johnson's veto. It declared that nearly everyone born in
2:22:14
Speaker 1: the United States was a citizen, while preserving an exception
2:22:17
Speaker 1: for many Native Americans living under tribal sovereignty. It was
2:22:22
Speaker 1: a direct repudiation of dread Scott. But Congress did immediately
2:22:26
Speaker 1: see a weakness in its statute, because the statute could
2:22:30
Speaker 1: be repealed. A future court could strike it down as
2:22:33
Speaker 1: unconstitutional if the court chose, if citizenship was going to
2:22:38
Speaker 1: survive changing political majorities, you couldn't have it rest on
2:22:43
Speaker 1: a law. It had to rest in the Constitution. So
2:22:46
Speaker 1: here's what Congress wrote. It was one sentence, All persons
2:22:50
Speaker 1: born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to
2:22:52
Speaker 1: the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States. Every
2:22:58
Speaker 1: word matters in that sense, the middle phrase subject to
2:23:01
Speaker 1: the jurisdiction thereof. Those words were back before the Supreme
2:23:06
Speaker 1: Court this summer in Trump versus Barbara, Chief Justice John
2:23:11
Speaker 1: Roberts writing for basically a six to three majority, right,
2:23:14
Speaker 1: you could call it five and a half to three
2:23:15
Speaker 1: and a half with the weird Kavanaugh split split decision there.
2:23:20
Speaker 1: But they did conclude that children born in the United
2:23:22
Speaker 1: States to parents here unlawfully or temporarily satisfy both requirements
2:23:26
Speaker 1: of the citizenship clause. They are born here and they
2:23:30
Speaker 1: are subject to American jurisdiction. Whatever your views on immigration policy,
2:23:33
Speaker 1: notice what the court was doing. It wasn't deciding what
2:23:36
Speaker 1: immigration policy ought to be. It was simply deciding what
2:23:39
Speaker 1: those constitutional words mean. If you were subject of the
2:23:41
Speaker 1: jurisdiction up, then you're a citizen. Roberts didn't invent doctrine.
2:23:46
Speaker 1: He was relying on one that was more than one
2:23:48
Speaker 1: hundred years old. Now let me tell you the story
2:23:53
Speaker 1: of Wang kim Arc. He was born in San Francisco
2:23:58
Speaker 1: in eighteen seventy three. Remember the Naturalization Act. Congress expanded
2:24:04
Speaker 1: it in eighteen seventy to include persons of African nativity
2:24:08
Speaker 1: and descent, but Chinese immigrants remained excluded from that act.
2:24:14
Speaker 1: Wang's parents could legally live in America, they could never
2:24:17
Speaker 1: become American citizens through naturalization. Then, in eighteen ninety five,
2:24:22
Speaker 1: twenty two year old Wang kim Ark returned home after
2:24:25
Speaker 1: visiting family in China. When he stepped off the ship
2:24:28
Speaker 1: in San Francisco, the government told him he might not belong.
2:24:32
Speaker 1: Its argument deserves to be understood. His parents were lawfully
2:24:36
Speaker 1: domiciled in California, but they remained subjects of the Emperor
2:24:40
Speaker 1: of China. Perhaps, government lawyers argued their son therefore wasn't
2:24:44
Speaker 1: fully subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. Well,
2:24:47
Speaker 1: the Supreme Court disagreed, and in the United States versus
2:24:50
Speaker 1: Wan kim Ark in eighteen ninety eight, it held that
2:24:52
Speaker 1: a child born in the United States two parents lawfully
2:24:56
Speaker 1: domiciled here was an American citizen from birth. That decision
2:25:01
Speaker 1: became the constitutional foundation beneath this summer's one, because remember
2:25:06
Speaker 1: the exception Congress left in the Civil Rights Act of
2:25:08
Speaker 1: eighteen sixty six. The Court had already faced that same
2:25:13
Speaker 1: question fourteen years before one came on. In Elk versus
2:25:17
Speaker 1: Wilkins in eighteen eighty four, it held that John Elk,
2:25:20
Speaker 1: a Native American who had left his tribe, still wasn't
2:25:23
Speaker 1: a citizen at birth under the Fourteenth Amendment. Leaving tribal
2:25:27
Speaker 1: life wasn't enough. Congress eventually addressed that gap through the
2:25:30
Speaker 1: Indian Citizenship app of nineteen twenty four. But notice what
2:25:35
Speaker 1: happened in all of this, The constitutional text itself never changed.
2:25:39
Speaker 1: That fix came by statute, not by a court ruling. Either.
2:25:43
Speaker 1: Congress saw the remaining gap exactly the way it had
2:25:46
Speaker 1: first tried to solve the citizenship gap pre fourteenth Amendment
2:25:49
Speaker 1: in eighteen sixty six by simply passing a law. Now,
2:25:53
Speaker 1: let's step back. America's approach wasn't unique across the Western hemisphere.
2:25:57
Speaker 1: Broad birthright citizenship became common throughout much of the Americas.
2:26:02
Speaker 1: Settlers societies confronted similar questions, how do you turn newcomers
2:26:07
Speaker 1: and especially their children into fellow citizens now? Europe generally
2:26:10
Speaker 1: answered that question much differently, relying more heavily on ancestry, parentage,
2:26:15
Speaker 1: or even settled residents. You can make an argument neither
2:26:19
Speaker 1: approaches inherently more or less democratic. They're just products of
2:26:23
Speaker 1: different histories. The nations of Europe largely grew out of
2:26:26
Speaker 1: older civilizations. The nations of Americas were actually trying to
2:26:30
Speaker 1: build new ones. Right, there were a bunch of literal immigrants.
2:26:36
Speaker 1: More than a century later, Ronald Reagan captured that distinction
2:26:40
Speaker 1: in language no constitutional lawyer ever could. In the final
2:26:44
Speaker 1: speech of his presidency was on January nineteenth, nineteen eighty nine.
2:26:47
Speaker 1: It was not the televised federal address that most people remember,
2:26:50
Speaker 1: but it was literally his last remarks before leaving office.
2:26:53
Speaker 1: He was doing a Medal of honor ceremony. I believe
2:26:57
Speaker 1: he paused, and he says he said the following. He says,
2:27:01
Speaker 1: it was best stated in a letter I received not
2:27:03
Speaker 1: long ago, he said, And he says, a man wrote me,
2:27:05
Speaker 1: and the writer observed that someone could move to many
2:27:07
Speaker 1: countries without ever fully becoming any of them. Right, you
2:27:10
Speaker 1: could move to France and not become a Frenchman. You
2:27:12
Speaker 1: moved to Japan not become to Japanese. But someone from
2:27:15
Speaker 1: any corner of the earth could come to America and
2:27:18
Speaker 1: become a citizen and become an American. Those weren't just
2:27:21
Speaker 1: Reagan's words. He was quoting someone else, But the fourteenth
2:27:25
Speaker 1: Amendment itself had already made that idea constitution. So look,
2:27:29
Speaker 1: we Americans have not ever stopped arguing about who belongs here.
2:27:34
Speaker 1: We've argued about Black Americans, Chinese immigrants, Native Americans, Catholics, Jews,
2:27:40
Speaker 1: the Irish, the Japanese, Muslims, refugees. Today we argue about
2:27:45
Speaker 1: immigration and citizenship. Those arguments will continue, democracy requires them.
2:27:51
Speaker 1: But after July twenty eight, eighteen sixty eight, one thing changed.
2:27:54
Speaker 1: The Constitution stopped, leaving the citizenship question unanswered. We have
2:27:59
Speaker 1: an answer. You don't have to like it. You can
2:28:01
Speaker 1: debate it, but we have an answer. John Elk, the
2:28:06
Speaker 1: Native American, reminds us of that. Jim Crow reminds us
2:28:09
Speaker 1: of that. Japanese Internment reminds us of that. Every generation
2:28:12
Speaker 1: has found new ways to fall short of that promise.
2:28:16
Speaker 1: But after reconstruction, those failures increasingly had to justify themselves
2:28:21
Speaker 1: against the actual Constitution. Thanks to the Fourteenth Amendment that said,
2:28:27
Speaker 1: rather than claim the Constitution was on their side. That
2:28:30
Speaker 1: may be the greatest achievement of the Fourteenth Amendment. It
2:28:33
Speaker 1: didn't end America's oldest argument. It just simply changed the
2:28:37
Speaker 1: Constitution's answer. Because the Declaration of Independence imagined that America
2:28:43
Speaker 1: would be an identity, not an ethnicity, an idea not
2:28:46
Speaker 1: an ethnicity or identity. The original Constitution built the government
2:28:50
Speaker 1: that was supposed to be responsive to that, and the
2:28:53
Speaker 1: Fourteenth Amendment finally answered one of the hardest questions an
2:28:56
Speaker 1: neighbor nation ever faces. Who belongs inside that promise? So
2:29:01
Speaker 1: that's why certification. That certification, signed in July twenty eight,
2:29:05
Speaker 1: eighteen sixty eight, still shaped so many constitutional debates today.
2:29:11
Speaker 1: It is what makes us different and if you like
2:29:16
Speaker 1: the fact that there is something called American exception. This
2:29:20
Speaker 1: is what makes us exceptional. Only Canada and the G
2:29:23
Speaker 1: seven has birthright citizenship. The rest of the G seven
2:29:27
Speaker 1: does not. They're afraid. They don't have people come into
2:29:33
Speaker 1: their countries to be part of an idea. They have
2:29:38
Speaker 1: people coming to be part of their identity. And that's
2:29:40
Speaker 1: a big distinction. Ask Chuck, all right, let's take a
2:29:52
Speaker 1: few questions here. I know have gone along a little
2:29:55
Speaker 1: bit long today, but hey, let's stay right. We're going
2:30:00
Speaker 1: to start with Mark each and Allen, Texas, and he
2:30:02
Speaker 1: writes he had a thought the other day beyond the
2:30:04
Speaker 1: church photo op or ai images portraying him as a doctor,
2:30:07
Speaker 1: have you seen Donald Trump do or say anything that
2:30:09
Speaker 1: genuinely suggests he has a personal religious faith. Given a
2:30:12
Speaker 1: strong support among evangelical voters, I'm curious whether you think
2:30:16
Speaker 1: they view his faith differently than his public PERSONA suggests,
2:30:19
Speaker 1: thanks you mean, mister two Corinthians. Look, he does not
2:30:24
Speaker 1: have any serious faith if you have followed him closely.
2:30:30
Speaker 1: He basically created this illusion that he was God fearing
2:30:37
Speaker 1: and a serious Christian when he started running for president,
2:30:40
Speaker 1: when he was desperate for the evangelical vote. In fact,
2:30:42
Speaker 1: it's all goes back if you remember, and you want
2:30:45
Speaker 1: to talk about one of my I think the most important.
2:30:49
Speaker 1: There's all sorts of what ifs to the twenty sixteen election, right,
2:30:52
Speaker 1: you know, sort of butterfly effects. The biggest one for
2:30:55
Speaker 1: me has always been Scalia's death, right, and Scalea's death
2:30:59
Speaker 1: sort of put the issue of Supreme Court and certainly
2:31:05
Speaker 1: religious conservatives in particular for many of them that are
2:31:08
Speaker 1: political activists, Supreme Court picks for the be all end
2:31:12
Speaker 1: dollar presidential politics. So you know, this is why he
2:31:16
Speaker 1: had to agree to like a list that somebody else provided.
2:31:19
Speaker 1: Nobody trusted him he is. Look this is you know,
2:31:24
Speaker 1: you could go through. He has never been a serious
2:31:28
Speaker 1: religious scholar. I don't think he knows, you know, he
2:31:31
Speaker 1: knows as much about the New Testament as I do.
2:31:33
Speaker 1: And I wasn't raised on it. He supposedly was. And
2:31:37
Speaker 1: so no, he is not a man of faith, never
2:31:40
Speaker 1: has been a man of faith. How often do you
2:31:42
Speaker 1: see him, I mean, just look at how few times
2:31:45
Speaker 1: he goes to church, right and compare it to how
2:31:49
Speaker 1: often Biden went weekly. He was very serious about his Catholicism,
2:31:53
Speaker 1: didn't necessarily shove it down the throats of everybody else
2:31:55
Speaker 1: in the country. Barack Obama regularly went to church, and
2:31:58
Speaker 1: he went to different churches around DC. George W. Bush
2:32:02
Speaker 1: regularly win, Bill Clinton regularly win. I mean, for somebody
2:32:06
Speaker 1: who claims to be as religious as he claims to be,
2:32:09
Speaker 1: he never goes, right, He does not go very often.
2:32:13
Speaker 1: And I think that if you really are looking for
2:32:15
Speaker 1: the tell, where does he where? Where's he going to
2:32:18
Speaker 1: be on a Sunday morning? Nine times out of ten
2:32:20
Speaker 1: on a golf course, He's not going to be at
2:32:21
Speaker 1: a pew. And I think it's just he's never it's
2:32:25
Speaker 1: never been who he is. And you could say, is
2:32:27
Speaker 1: that the New Yorker in him? Right? You know, there's
2:32:29
Speaker 1: this perception that New Yorkers are very religious, and you know,
2:32:34
Speaker 1: but he's he It's clear. Put it this way, there
2:32:38
Speaker 1: was never any history of him with religion until twenty fifteen,
2:32:41
Speaker 1: twenty sixteen, when he saw it as a political necessity
2:32:44
Speaker 1: in order to leave the Republican Party in that era.
2:32:48
Speaker 1: And yes, if you're saying I'm pretty cynical about that,
2:32:50
Speaker 1: I am pretty cynical about that, because I think I mean,
2:32:53
Speaker 1: I am I can't stand people that use religion for
2:32:57
Speaker 1: political purposes if they're not even about their religion, I'm
2:33:01
Speaker 1: not crazy about it. If you're serious about religion and
2:33:03
Speaker 1: you insert politics and do it, it's not my favorite thing.
2:33:05
Speaker 1: But I'll respect your faith. But he's not serious about
2:33:08
Speaker 1: his faith. There's no there's no there there, and it's
2:33:11
Speaker 1: it's pretty obvious. Hey, Chuck, it's Donovan from anna Arundo County, Maryland.
2:33:17
Speaker 1: It's go Nats till the day I die. All right,
2:33:20
Speaker 1: I appreciate that, Docta. I've seen discussion about a provision
2:33:23
Speaker 1: in the NDAA that would deepen us. It's rarely military
2:33:25
Speaker 1: and technological cooperation. What do you think the long term
2:33:28
Speaker 1: strategic goal is and do you see any connection between
2:33:30
Speaker 1: the effort and the growing religious rhetoric about Israel. It's
2:33:32
Speaker 1: in circulating media and social media discussions. Thanks, don Look,
2:33:36
Speaker 1: I think this has been over sold on what it is,
2:33:40
Speaker 1: and I think it's certainly been a bit over sold,
2:33:43
Speaker 1: probably because I think there's there's folks on both sides
2:33:48
Speaker 1: of the aisle that would like to see this deal lesson. Look,
2:33:56
Speaker 1: these this has been happening over the last ten years.
2:34:00
Speaker 1: We've been deepening I mean, Barack Obama probably did more
2:34:03
Speaker 1: for Israeli defense than any president this century. Donald Trump included.
2:34:09
Speaker 1: He was president when so much technology was shared and offered.
2:34:14
Speaker 1: You know, iron Dome wouldn't it wouldn't be a thing
2:34:16
Speaker 1: without the United States military. So and do I think
2:34:21
Speaker 1: there are some people that vote for this who view Look,
2:34:25
Speaker 1: there is this is the uncomfortable part of sort of
2:34:29
Speaker 1: what I would call Israeli politics in Congress, which is
2:34:33
Speaker 1: the state of Israel has used evangelical beliefs about Jews
2:34:39
Speaker 1: and the necessity of Jews going back to Israel for
2:34:43
Speaker 1: the second coming as as almost like a lobbyist weapon,
2:34:49
Speaker 1: if you will, to get support for this. It's you know,
2:34:54
Speaker 1: this is the part of the conversation that we never
2:34:57
Speaker 1: talk about out loud because it's so uncomfortable. Right, I'm
2:35:03
Speaker 1: very uncomfortable with the fact that there are many people
2:35:05
Speaker 1: who support Israel's right to exist, who want me to
2:35:08
Speaker 1: leave this country and go to Israel. It's just a
2:35:15
Speaker 1: it's a it's been it's you know, and look, Israel
2:35:19
Speaker 1: is sort of leaned into it, right by leaning into
2:35:23
Speaker 1: the evangelical tourism, right, my kakapy being it that entire
2:35:29
Speaker 1: sort of the mythology of the New Testament. And you know,
2:35:33
Speaker 1: I for those of you that are believers, you may
2:35:36
Speaker 1: be offended that I use mythology. I'm sorry, you know.
2:35:39
Speaker 1: And by the way, if you've seen the Odyssey, hopefully
2:35:41
Speaker 1: you realize that if you've read the Odyssey, how much
2:35:45
Speaker 1: how much the Bible borrows from ancient Greece. But I
2:35:51
Speaker 1: will digress there. I leave that to other scholars who
2:35:56
Speaker 1: can make the point a lot better than I can.
2:36:00
Speaker 1: But Donovan, you've gotten into what I think is what
2:36:03
Speaker 1: makes this such a weird debate sometimes about is that
2:36:11
Speaker 1: it does feel as if the use of again, you know,
2:36:16
Speaker 1: in order to accelerate the Second Coming, what does it
2:36:19
Speaker 1: take right? Has been used as a way to build
2:36:21
Speaker 1: support for Israel in Congress, And it's a It's just
2:36:29
Speaker 1: it's one of those things that we all know is
2:36:31
Speaker 1: true and we don't talk about it very much. I'll
2:36:36
Speaker 1: just be honest, I find it very uncomfortable. That is
2:36:38
Speaker 1: that is, I'd rather somebody support on the merits, not
2:36:46
Speaker 1: on a not on a on a hopeful religious belief.
2:36:50
Speaker 1: That's a that's you know, not all of us believe
2:36:55
Speaker 1: that these religious texts are somehow a prophecy that's going
2:36:59
Speaker 1: to happen. Uh, And so that it's a it's a
2:37:02
Speaker 1: it's certainly I think not the best way to make
2:37:04
Speaker 1: defense policy. But let's talk about the larger politics here.
2:37:07
Speaker 1: I mean, this is this is the last bill that's
2:37:11
Speaker 1: going to be this helpful to the Israelis that comes
2:37:13
Speaker 1: out of this Congress, the next Congress or the congress
2:37:15
Speaker 1: after that. I think it's pretty clear Israel has Israel,
2:37:19
Speaker 1: and bb Netahou in particular is the worst lobbyist now
2:37:23
Speaker 1: on behalf of Israel. And if they don't change leaders
2:37:26
Speaker 1: this year, they're only going to see support you official
2:37:31
Speaker 1: US support for Israel decline further and further and further.
2:37:36
Speaker 1: But it all starts with bb UH and the Israeli
2:37:39
Speaker 1: people realizing that bb is the single biggest impediment to
2:37:46
Speaker 1: peace and security for Israel. I believe that, and I
2:37:50
Speaker 1: think a lot of American Jews believe that as well.
2:37:52
Speaker 1: All right, I'll do I've got to I've got a
2:37:54
Speaker 1: return question. Mark Mark H had a second question in here,
2:37:57
Speaker 1: and I apologize for not reading it. I read it
2:37:59
Speaker 1: out of order. Mark from allent TeX's second question was, Hey,
2:38:03
Speaker 1: I'm still basking in the socks is historic winning street. Hey,
2:38:07
Speaker 1: and then that's just had a great trait with the socks.
2:38:11
Speaker 1: I think taking one of your pictures on starting pictures
2:38:14
Speaker 1: on an il giving you our one year rental of
2:38:16
Speaker 1: Curtis Meat, so enjoy. We've loved Curtis Meat. Here is
2:38:19
Speaker 1: match you guys will love him too. He's got the
2:38:23
Speaker 1: Australian accents. Go play well in Boston. I have a feeling,
2:38:25
Speaker 1: especially if he keeps playing as well as he's been
2:38:27
Speaker 1: playing for us, he goes. But you've been But your
2:38:29
Speaker 1: real question is this. I've been thinking about impeachment lately.
2:38:31
Speaker 1: If a president were convicted and removed from office, what
2:38:33
Speaker 1: actually happens next? How immediate is the transition of power?
2:38:37
Speaker 1: What benefits or protections would they keep her lose? And
2:38:40
Speaker 1: who would physically remove them if they refuse to leave. Also,
2:38:43
Speaker 1: from a legal standpoint, is it more effective to pursue
2:38:46
Speaker 1: the clearest, provable offense rather than the broadest allegations, which
2:38:49
Speaker 1: you'll think, well, Mark, look at this point, I just
2:38:53
Speaker 1: wouldn't do it. And you know we have the best
2:38:55
Speaker 1: case to remove a president. Happened and in twenty twenty one,
2:39:01
Speaker 1: and Mitch McConnell, in what will be a legacy defining decision,
2:39:07
Speaker 1: chose not to vote to convict, probably the single biggest
2:39:11
Speaker 1: mistake of his political career, and it will be a
2:39:15
Speaker 1: stain on his legacy forever. And I will tell you this,
2:39:22
Speaker 1: I think it belongs in the second paragraph. It's not
2:39:24
Speaker 1: the first paragraph of his obituary, but it certainly belongs
2:39:26
Speaker 1: to the second paragraph because it was consequential. He alone
2:39:30
Speaker 1: could have rid his party of this of this mess,
2:39:33
Speaker 1: and he chose not to do it for fear of
2:39:37
Speaker 1: not being able to win the Senate majority in twenty
2:39:39
Speaker 1: twenty two, which, ultimately right, That's always what Mitch McConnell
2:39:43
Speaker 1: was consumed by. Could he keep or get Senate control?
2:39:47
Speaker 1: That's all that. That was his north star all the time.
2:39:50
Speaker 1: So as a party leader, he was very effective. As
2:39:53
Speaker 1: a institutionalist for the United States Senate, he was very weak.
2:39:58
Speaker 1: So anyway, but your question on impeachment, look, it's immediate, right,
2:40:07
Speaker 1: and then I mean it is immediate President had Senate,
2:40:11
Speaker 1: Speaker of the House, it's done. The vice president should
2:40:15
Speaker 1: be basically supposed to get sworn in, you know, immediately,
2:40:18
Speaker 1: and he's removed from office, escorted from office. However, it works,
2:40:23
Speaker 1: and even if he refuses to leave the office, he
2:40:25
Speaker 1: will all of is the Congress will have taken away
2:40:28
Speaker 1: his duties like he doesn't have any He has no
2:40:31
Speaker 1: constitutional support for any actions he attempts to take. So
2:40:37
Speaker 1: and because the but this is why the bar is
2:40:39
Speaker 1: so high for conviction. So you have bipartisan You have
2:40:43
Speaker 1: to have bipartisan support for a conviction of a duly
2:40:47
Speaker 1: elected president to stick like that. So I do think
2:40:50
Speaker 1: the system the bar is high for a reason in
2:40:54
Speaker 1: order to guarantee this transition actually happens. If you had
2:40:58
Speaker 1: a lower bar, then you might have more problems than that.
2:41:01
Speaker 1: But you're asking me a question. We've never done, right,
2:41:05
Speaker 1: We've never We've never seen we've never had a successfully
2:41:10
Speaker 1: convicted president. We've successfully indicted a president, which is what
2:41:15
Speaker 1: an impeachment is, but we've never convicted one successfully. So
2:41:19
Speaker 1: we really have no precedent for it. But there's there's
2:41:22
Speaker 1: there's no provision that says, you know, you wait a
2:41:24
Speaker 1: week or you wait till they get that new I
2:41:27
Speaker 1: mean it is immediate, uh, And it's always these things
2:41:31
Speaker 1: have always been treated as immediate, right, you know, as
2:41:34
Speaker 1: soon as you take the earth you've been sworn in.
2:41:41
Speaker 1: Next question comes from Adam B of Davy, Florida, as
2:41:45
Speaker 1: he says he's newly in the twenty fifth district. Now
2:41:51
Speaker 1: he wanted to know what happened to that silly Jerryman
2:41:53
Speaker 1: during Amendment he voted for that. Apparently Florida lawmakers and
2:41:57
Speaker 1: the spread Court just totally ignored. But anyway, as probably
2:42:02
Speaker 1: the at least the vice president of the Five Timers
2:42:06
Speaker 1: ass Chuck Club, Adam writes as someone who was pretty
2:42:10
Speaker 1: much consumed contemporary politics daily since nine eleven, I've never
2:42:14
Speaker 1: had the desire to read a political book. I saved
2:42:15
Speaker 1: my reading for Escapism, But now I want to dabble
2:42:18
Speaker 1: in political literature. What are a couple of books that
2:42:20
Speaker 1: would be fun, non preachy read, offer plenty of behind
2:42:22
Speaker 1: the scenes access and being easy vacation read around two
2:42:25
Speaker 1: to three hundred pages, Thanks again, Adam. Look, I think
2:42:29
Speaker 1: Regime Change is a great read. It was a terrific
2:42:32
Speaker 1: read because it's sort of one right, you know, but
2:42:37
Speaker 1: you know it's funny about these Trump books, and I
2:42:39
Speaker 1: felt the same way. After reading Regime Change. I learned
2:42:45
Speaker 1: a lot of anecdotes, but I didn't learn anything new,
2:42:47
Speaker 1: and I don't that's no disrespect to the two authors.
2:42:50
Speaker 1: I think it was important that they chronicle like that
2:42:53
Speaker 1: everything we were concerned about in the first term. It
2:42:55
Speaker 1: was on steroids in the second term. So I learned
2:42:59
Speaker 1: a lot of specific about the people around him, but
2:43:03
Speaker 1: in some ways I didn't learn anything new about who
2:43:05
Speaker 1: Trump is and what kind of presidency he wants to have,
2:43:07
Speaker 1: et cetera. But it's a very easy read and a
2:43:12
Speaker 1: good read, and it's well written. It's easy to consume,
2:43:15
Speaker 1: and so I don't don't dismiss regime change here. I
2:43:18
Speaker 1: think it's very good. At at some point we're gonna
2:43:21
Speaker 1: Maggie and or Jonathan on. I know Maggie a lot
2:43:23
Speaker 1: better than I know Jonathan, But either way, I look
2:43:25
Speaker 1: forward to those guys and we're gonna we're going to
2:43:27
Speaker 1: have them sort of after they've made one run through
2:43:30
Speaker 1: all the all the different places to go to sell
2:43:35
Speaker 1: your book. But that that that is one. There's one
2:43:39
Speaker 1: other book, Who I, which I think was also an
2:43:42
Speaker 1: easy read, and frankly is I think the single best
2:43:47
Speaker 1: primer to understand what what is, what happened, what was
2:43:51
Speaker 1: happening inside the Republican Party before Trump took it over
2:43:54
Speaker 1: and it's the McKay coppins book Romney A Reckoning. I
2:43:59
Speaker 1: think it it's very easy to read because it feels
2:44:02
Speaker 1: first person. You're you're getting Romney's innermost thoughts. So those
2:44:07
Speaker 1: would be you're asking for two that are consumable. I
2:44:11
Speaker 1: know what you mean by this, right, I would tell you.
2:44:13
Speaker 1: I'm not going to tell you to read there to
2:44:15
Speaker 1: share a Judas book about Where All the Democrats Gone,
2:44:17
Speaker 1: which is an incredibly important book, but it's probably a
2:44:20
Speaker 1: tag dryer. But if you're looking for funny weird, you know,
2:44:25
Speaker 1: both regime change and Romney are reckoning, I think, or
2:44:28
Speaker 1: as as good as any two for today's politics. But
2:44:35
Speaker 1: you know I'm with you, man, I do more escapism
2:44:38
Speaker 1: than ever before. Give me a good lawyer who done it,
2:44:42
Speaker 1: which is where I gravitate towards. I fully confess. But
2:44:46
Speaker 1: give me that, or give me my friend Danny Silva
2:44:49
Speaker 1: and a Gabrielle Lan mystery, which which in some ways
2:44:53
Speaker 1: I think does a good job of feeling like you're
2:44:57
Speaker 1: you're not just eating dessert, You're getting a little bit
2:45:00
Speaker 1: of a of an educational meal about European politics. For instance,
2:45:05
Speaker 1: in this most recent one, So don't dismiss h really
2:45:12
Speaker 1: well researched fiction, and Daniel Silva is probably the best
2:45:18
Speaker 1: example of well researched fiction in temporary fiction. All right,
2:45:25
Speaker 1: last question goes to another Oregon A, Scott C. I
2:45:31
Speaker 1: know you're you might be a five timer at this point,
2:45:33
Speaker 1: organ sixth Congressional District. I am an advocate of Oregon
2:45:37
Speaker 1: being first on the West. I think there's enough well
2:45:40
Speaker 1: geographical diversity and constituency diversity and electric diversity of make
2:45:46
Speaker 1: to make Oregon unique. Some rural, some urban, growing Latino population,
2:45:51
Speaker 1: et cetera. I'd love to hear from you about that. Obviously,
2:45:54
Speaker 1: the mail in battling and taking an hour, taking a
2:45:57
Speaker 1: week to get the results would be a pain in
2:45:59
Speaker 1: the you know what, But I'm curious for you anyway.
2:46:01
Speaker 1: Let me get to your question, he says, I'm reaching
2:46:02
Speaker 1: out once again for your insight. CNN recently covered Republicans
2:46:05
Speaker 1: comparing olive gardens requirement to show ID for its unlimited
2:46:08
Speaker 1: past to pass to voter ID laws, and the reporter
2:46:11
Speaker 1: said voter fraud has almost never affected the outcome of
2:46:13
Speaker 1: an election. Has the kind of voter fraud often cited
2:46:15
Speaker 1: by Republicans, dead voters, don't identities, undocumented immigrants, casting ballots
2:46:19
Speaker 1: ever actually changed the outcome an election? If not, why
2:46:21
Speaker 1: do journalists say almost never in stead of simply never
2:46:24
Speaker 1: appreciate you as always got sea Well, because we have
2:46:27
Speaker 1: had a couple of results the most. There are two
2:46:30
Speaker 1: infamous ones. One is the one in the ninth congressional district,
2:46:34
Speaker 1: Republican voter fraud that ride in That was pretty well
2:46:37
Speaker 1: documented about six years ago. And then there was one
2:46:40
Speaker 1: in my neck of the woods. It was absentee ballot
2:46:42
Speaker 1: fraud by Xavier Suarez when he ran for mayor, and
2:46:47
Speaker 1: it was documented, it was they had to redo the election.
2:46:50
Speaker 1: It was it was so so no, you can't say
2:46:52
Speaker 1: it's never happened. There's you know, the almost never. There's
2:46:56
Speaker 1: a reason they say almost never because those are the
2:46:58
Speaker 1: there are two glaring examples where it did impact an
2:47:01
Speaker 1: outcome and it didn't And in the case of Miami,
2:47:04
Speaker 1: they essentially redo an election on that front. So so
2:47:10
Speaker 1: you can't say it didn't change. But that Miami mayors
2:47:14
Speaker 1: I think it was ninety seven. I think it was
2:47:16
Speaker 1: nineteen ninety seven if memory served, maybe a nineteen ninety nine,
2:47:19
Speaker 1: but it was definitely towards the end of the twentieth century,
2:47:22
Speaker 1: and it was Suarez, the father of the most of
2:47:25
Speaker 1: Francisuairez if you're keeping score at home, who of course,
2:47:28
Speaker 1: was the mayor of Miami that ran for president for
2:47:30
Speaker 1: about for odd second there. But that is the one,
2:47:34
Speaker 1: by the way, just a quick ramp. If Republicans really
2:47:37
Speaker 1: wanted just making sure that everybody had to show a
2:47:41
Speaker 1: valid form of ID a VALLID, federal I D passport,
2:47:45
Speaker 1: state issue, driver's license, et cetera before they voted, it
2:47:48
Speaker 1: would pass. That is not what the Save Act is about.
2:47:52
Speaker 1: The Saved Act is not about that at all. It
2:47:55
Speaker 1: is about it is creating all sorts of bureaucracy and complications,
2:47:59
Speaker 1: particularly for women. And really it's a pretty really essentially
2:48:05
Speaker 1: punishes any woman that takes their husband's last name. Kind
2:48:10
Speaker 1: of ironic that the Republicans are pushing this bill. They
2:48:12
Speaker 1: want more traditional family units and traditional practices like taking
2:48:16
Speaker 1: the you know, having one last name, and yet they're
2:48:20
Speaker 1: making it that much harder for women who change their
2:48:25
Speaker 1: names and take their husband names to actually participate in
2:48:29
Speaker 1: our democracy should they pass that law. So it's exhausting
2:48:35
Speaker 1: to watch this incorrect rhetoric constantly. I mean, Mike Lee,
2:48:40
Speaker 1: Rick Scott, Donald Trump are probably the three biggest purveyors
2:48:43
Speaker 1: of this. Everybody else knows that this quote Save Act
2:48:47
Speaker 1: is not about voter I D. Because if it were
2:48:49
Speaker 1: just about voter I D, it would have seventy votes
2:48:52
Speaker 1: in the Senate, maybe eighty. But it's not about voter
2:48:56
Speaker 1: I D, which tells you something. If they cared about
2:48:59
Speaker 1: this issue, then they would just do this photo I
2:49:02
Speaker 1: D thought. But they don't care about the issue. This
2:49:05
Speaker 1: is it. They don't want this to pass. This Save
2:49:08
Speaker 1: Act was created so that it wouldn't pass, so they
2:49:10
Speaker 1: could have the issue so they could keep create the
2:49:14
Speaker 1: illusion of doubt. Remember that every time they refuse to
2:49:20
Speaker 1: pare down the save AC. If they claim this is
2:49:22
Speaker 1: about voter ID, then just make it a valid photo
2:49:27
Speaker 1: I D. But they won't because they know that will pass.
2:49:35
Speaker 1: All right, that's enough questions. It's trade deadline week. So far,
2:49:41
Speaker 1: so good for the Nats. I'm gonna miss Curtis me
2:49:43
Speaker 1: as I said earlier, but I like that we turned
2:49:46
Speaker 1: a one year signing because look, we didn't have him
2:49:48
Speaker 1: under multi year contract. He was kind of a flyer.
2:49:51
Speaker 1: He was on the DFA pile. We pick him up,
2:49:55
Speaker 1: our hitting coaches transform him into something. He's finally living
2:49:59
Speaker 1: up to his to what he was as a prospect.
2:50:03
Speaker 1: We were able to turn that into a multi year
2:50:06
Speaker 1: to a left handed starting pitcher from Boston kind of
2:50:08
Speaker 1: on anio but who's on a who's under contract for
2:50:12
Speaker 1: a couple of years. So score one for Team Washington
2:50:16
Speaker 1: on that one. Uh, this was Boston looking for help
2:50:20
Speaker 1: right now and Curtis Mean is the type of guy
2:50:24
Speaker 1: I think could probably even play any position. But he
2:50:28
Speaker 1: he had sort of you know, with a right and
2:50:31
Speaker 1: plus right handed right handed powerheading right now is there's
2:50:36
Speaker 1: there's a huge demand for it. So so far, so good.
2:50:42
Speaker 1: I don't like the chatter I'm hearing about Abrams. If
2:50:49
Speaker 1: you think you're going to have a winner in the
2:50:50
Speaker 1: next two to three years, Abrams should be part of
2:50:52
Speaker 1: that plan. If you do not believe the Nats can
2:50:55
Speaker 1: be a winner in the next two or three years,
2:50:57
Speaker 1: or if you believe you have a better shortstop than CJ.
2:50:59
Speaker 1: Abram in the in the system, which I believe we
2:51:02
Speaker 1: do not, then sure, go ahead and trade, but you
2:51:07
Speaker 1: want to kick the fan base and the total nuts,
2:51:10
Speaker 1: trade c j ems at this trade deadline. Please don't
2:51:14
Speaker 1: kick us in the nuts. Learner family, all right, And
2:51:17
Speaker 1: with that, I'll see in about I'll see you later
2:51:20
Speaker 1: this week. I'll see in super Tuesday for sure with
2:51:23
Speaker 1: my pow Crystalizo of course that comes to your feet
2:51:25
Speaker 1: every Tuesdays. We'll have more on Thursday. And yes, check
2:51:29
Speaker 1: out Doug Jones and might sit down with him I
2:51:31
Speaker 1: one on one on Newsphere, which you can get on
2:51:34
Speaker 1: the new Sphere app with that until we upload the
2:51:36
Speaker 1: gap