Latest / Pod Save America / “Juneteenth and the GOP’s anti-anti-racism.” (with Jelani Cobb!)

Transcript

“Juneteenth and the GOP’s anti-anti-racism.” (with Jelani Cobb!) · Pod Save America

• 0:00
  Speaker 1: Thank you.
• 0:20
  Speaker 2: Welcome to Pod Save America. I'm Jon Favreau.
• 0:22
  Speaker 1: I'm Dan Pfeiffer.
• 0:23
  Speaker 2: On today's show, Joe Manchin is Joe Manchin-ing all over
• 0:26
  Speaker 2: infrastructure and voting rights legislation. New Yorker writer Jelani Cobb
• 0:30
  Speaker 2: joins to talk about the right-wing hysteria over teaching kids
• 0:33
  Speaker 2: about racism. And Joe Biden meets Vladimir Putin in the
• 0:37
  Speaker 2: most hotly anticipated summit of the summer. Just impossible to
• 0:42
  Speaker 2: get tickets, Dan. But first, but first, Juneteenth is just
• 0:48
  Speaker 2: around the corner and Crooked has some excellent episodes to celebrate.
• 0:52
  Speaker 2: DeRay and the gang talk about the importance of the
• 0:53
  Speaker 2: day on Pod Save the People. Akilah and Gideon talk
• 0:56
  Speaker 2: to UCLA professor Brenda Stevenson about how Juneteenth came to
• 0:59
  Speaker 2: be on What A Day. And Annamarie Cox is joined
• 1:02
  Speaker 2: by former U.S. Ambassador to Belize, Carlos Moreno, for a
• 1:05
  Speaker 2: discussion about the Tulsa Race Massacre. Check out all these
• 1:09
  Speaker 2: episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
• 1:11
  Speaker 1: Also.
• 1:12
  Speaker 2: The Crooked store has some great new additions. Our first
• 1:15
  Speaker 2: ever beach towels with phrases like vaccinated, let women run shit,
• 1:21
  Speaker 2: and gay for democracy. As always, a portion of every
• 1:25
  Speaker 2: order in the Crooked store is donated to vote riders.
• 1:28
  Speaker 2: Go shop now at crooked.com slash store. I'm very excited
• 1:32
  Speaker 2: for my vaccinated pool float, which is coming any day now.
• 1:35
  Speaker 1: Is that a real thing?
• 1:37
  Speaker 2: Yeah, Dan, it's a real thing. They sold out almost instantly.
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: Smart. That's like the Apple thing where you dramatically understock
• 1:45
  Speaker 1: to create a sense of demand.
• 1:46
  Speaker 2: Yeah, there's only 10 in the store. Very popular item.
• 1:51
  Speaker 2: All right, let's get to the news. We got two
• 1:53
  Speaker 2: big updates to talk about on infrastructure and voting rights
• 1:56
  Speaker 2: that both involve Washington's most annoying houseboat resident, Joe Manchin.
• 2:01
  Speaker 2: On infrastructure. Joe has now expanded his gang of bipartisan
• 2:05
  Speaker 2: goobers to 10 Democrats and 10 Republicans who have all
• 2:09
  Speaker 2: reached an agreement on a $ 1. 2 trillion plan focused on roads, bridges, railroads,
• 2:13
  Speaker 2: energy infrastructure, public transportation, and broadband that's financed without any
• 2:19
  Speaker 2: tax hikes. The dude who counts the votes on the
• 2:22
  Speaker 2: Republican side, Senate Minority Whip John Thune, said that the
• 2:25
  Speaker 2: plan has been received well by even his more conservative members.
• 2:29
  Speaker 2: But on the Democratic side, Budget Chairman Bernie Sanders has
• 2:32
  Speaker 2: already said he won't vote for the deal. And a
• 2:34
  Speaker 2: bunch of other progressives in the Senate and House are
• 2:36
  Speaker 2: saying that they won't vote for this bipartisan deal unless
• 2:39
  Speaker 2: all 50 Senate Democrats agree to pass a second reconciliation
• 2:43
  Speaker 2: bill that gets rid of some of the Trump tax
• 2:46
  Speaker 2: cuts to pay for climate, education, housing, caregiving, maybe even immigration.
• 2:51
  Speaker 2: And as one Democratic source told CNN, quote, every Democratic
• 2:55
  Speaker 2: priority from the last 40 years. All right, Dan, I
• 2:59
  Speaker 2: got some questions. First of all, what do you think of,
• 3:03
  Speaker 2: let's take it from the side of the progressives, the
• 3:05
  Speaker 2: side of Manchin and Sinema and the centrists, and then Biden.
• 3:09
  Speaker 2: On the progressive side, what do you think of this
• 3:11
  Speaker 2: strategy and how much leverage do they actually have here?
• 3:15
  Speaker 1: You would never know it from reading Politico, Punchbowl, or
• 3:19
  Speaker 1: any of the other Capitol Hill publications, but every vote
• 3:23
  Speaker 1: in the Senate counts the same. So Bernie Sanders' vote
• 3:26
  Speaker 1: is worth as much as Joe Manchin's vote Elizabeth Warren's
• 3:30
  Speaker 1: vote is worth as much as Kyrsten Sinema's vote. So yes,
• 3:32
  Speaker 1: they have all the leverage in the world if they
• 3:34
  Speaker 1: are really willing to tank a deal because it doesn't
• 3:38
  Speaker 1: have it. So that's part one. Part two of the
• 3:40
  Speaker 1: progressive point is they are morally correct that it is–
• 3:45
  Speaker 1: absolutely fucking insane that you would pass a trillion dollars
• 3:48
  Speaker 1: of infrastructure spending and not focus a large portion of
• 3:52
  Speaker 1: that on climate. Their slogan, no climate, no deal, is
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: an insane thing to do. Even in the search of
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: bipartisanship and improving airports that we haven't visited in a
• 4:04
  Speaker 1: very long time or roads we haven't driven on in
• 4:06
  Speaker 1: a long time, the idea that you would do that
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: is crazy. Because as everyone who's ever worked on Capitol
• 4:12
  Speaker 1: Hill or the Every legislative accomplishment makes the next one harder.
• 4:16
  Speaker 1: Every dollar spent makes the next dollar harder. So if
• 4:18
  Speaker 1: you're going to spend a trillion dollars on something that
• 4:20
  Speaker 1: doesn't help the climate, it's going to be that much
• 4:22
  Speaker 1: harder to spend the money you need to do something
• 4:25
  Speaker 1: about climate or any of the other things we care about.
• 4:28
  Speaker 2: I'm wondering how much leverage they actually have. I realize
• 4:31
  Speaker 2: their votes all count the same. But now that we
• 4:34
  Speaker 2: have a deal that Republicans seem to like, like John
• 4:38
  Speaker 2: Thune saying that so far they started with 10 Republican votes.
• 4:43
  Speaker 2: for this deal in the Senate. Then Jerry Moran came
• 4:47
  Speaker 2: on as the 11th Republican vote. So before they had
• 4:51
  Speaker 2: the 11th Republican vote, Bernie saying he was voting against
• 4:53
  Speaker 2: it meant that it wouldn't fly in the Senate, right?
• 4:56
  Speaker 2: Because you need 60 votes to pass something. So then
• 4:59
  Speaker 2: Jerry Moran says, oh, I'm for it. So now it
• 5:01
  Speaker 2: doesn't matter that Bernie's against it. I guess the question is,
• 5:03
  Speaker 2: how much leverage do the House progressives have? Because in
• 5:05
  Speaker 2: the Senate, like now you need another Senate Democrat to
• 5:10
  Speaker 2: come out and say no to tank the deal And
• 5:12
  Speaker 2: if Thune's saying that even some of his more conservative
• 5:15
  Speaker 2: members are open to it, you could conceivably see a
• 5:18
  Speaker 2: bipartisan infrastructure deal pass the House and the Senate with
• 5:21
  Speaker 2: Democratic and Republican votes, even if a bunch of progressives
• 5:24
  Speaker 2: say that they're opposed to the deal, correct?
• 5:26
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 5:26
  Speaker 2: I mean, the.
• 5:29
  Speaker 1: Sequencing matters here, right? It's easier for Bernie Sanders or
• 5:33
  Speaker 1: a Senate progressive where they would do it. It really
• 5:36
  Speaker 1: is not just Bernie, right? You have Markey, Heinrich, Merkley.
• 5:39
  Speaker 3: Warren.
• 5:40
  Speaker 1: Yeah, there's a whole bunch who say no climate, no deal. Currently,
• 5:42
  Speaker 1: there's no climate. Therefore, there is no deal. It's easier
• 5:46
  Speaker 1: to vote no on something that hasn't happened than it
• 5:49
  Speaker 1: is for a democratically controlled House to vote down a
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: bill that has the support of 70% of the Democratic
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: caucus in the Senate, presumably the support of President Biden,
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: to sink that bill. That's a much more challenging endeavor. Now,
• 6:03
  Speaker 1: that's at the end of the road. What can happen
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: is the Senate passes its deal and The House passes
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: an amended version or a different deal. And then there
• 6:11
  Speaker 1: is a, I mean, this is so crazy, but there's
• 6:13
  Speaker 1: a conference committee where people get together to hammer out
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: the differences. So there is leverage here. And it is
• 6:19
  Speaker 1: smart of everyone to highlight their opposition and their leverage
• 6:24
  Speaker 1: because it strengthens the hands of the Democratic negotiators in
• 6:27
  Speaker 1: the room. It makes it easier for the Democrats to say, well,
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: I can't do this because I'm going to lose. Republicans
• 6:34
  Speaker 1: get to do that all the time, right? Well, this
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: so-and-so is going to tank this, so-and-so is going to
• 6:37
  Speaker 1: tank this. Or Manchin's going to tank this or Sinema's
• 6:40
  Speaker 1: going to tank this. But it helps to be for
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: the White House and Schumer and everyone else involved to say, well,
• 6:45
  Speaker 1: that you can't do that or you have to include this. Otherwise,
• 6:48
  Speaker 1: there will be no deal because I cannot muster enough
• 6:50
  Speaker 1: of my caucus to do it, either in the House
• 6:52
  Speaker 1: or the Senate.
• 6:53
  Speaker 2: So in theory, this progressive strategy for saying, OK, I'm
• 6:56
  Speaker 2: not going to back this bipartisan deal until every Democrat
• 6:59
  Speaker 2: commits to a second simple majority reconciliation bill that contains
• 7:04
  Speaker 2: all of our other priorities and raises taxes on the rich.
• 7:06
  Speaker 2: Seems like a great idea. The challenge is Joe Manchin
• 7:12
  Speaker 2: won't commit to supporting a second reconciliation bill. Why do
• 7:17
  Speaker 2: you think he won't do that yet?
• 7:20
  Speaker 1: Because he wants leverage. And I also think if Joe
• 7:23
  Speaker 1: Manchin and Kyrsten Sinema committed to supporting a deal on reconciliation,
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: it would sink the bipartisan talks. Like this is ultimately like,
• 7:32
  Speaker 1: I've never seen something with more motion and less movement
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: than these infrastructure negotiations. It's like every day there's like
• 7:37
  Speaker 1: breathless reports about statements and like this pay for and
• 7:40
  Speaker 1: that pay for. But no one has yet put together
• 7:42
  Speaker 1: a plan that either is a bipartisan plan that actually
• 7:46
  Speaker 1: has 60 votes in a capacity to pass the House
• 7:48
  Speaker 1: or a partisan reconciliation plan that has 50 votes. And
• 7:53
  Speaker 1: you have progressive not committing to the bipartisan thing. You
• 7:56
  Speaker 1: have moderates not committing to a reconciliation plan and we're
• 8:00
  Speaker 1: just going in circles. And there is a little bit
• 8:01
  Speaker 1: of an alarming for the People Act situation here where
• 8:07
  Speaker 1: we do not know what Manchin and Sinema want to
• 8:11
  Speaker 1: include in a reconciliation deal if they were willing to
• 8:13
  Speaker 1: do that, right? Are they going to support a huge
• 8:17
  Speaker 1: childcare provision? We don't know that, right? And so we're
• 8:20
  Speaker 1: having this theoretical discussion of, well, it's like, well, we
• 8:22
  Speaker 1: can have this bipartisan deal right here that is insufficient
• 8:26
  Speaker 1: but better than nothing. Or we can have this giant,
• 8:29
  Speaker 1: amazing wish list of everything we care about. And that's
• 8:31
  Speaker 1: not a real thing. We don't know what that is.
• 8:33
  Speaker 1: Even if you could get Manchin to go along with
• 8:37
  Speaker 1: a reconciliation, which I will say is important to note
• 8:40
  Speaker 1: that he has not committed to it, but he has
• 8:42
  Speaker 1: not taken it off the table. Yeah.
• 8:43
  Speaker 2: I mean, look, we should say– I don't believe there's
• 8:46
  Speaker 2: anything objectionable in this bipartisan deal. It's just, as you said, insufficient, right?
• 8:51
  Speaker 2: A lot of spending on roads, bridges, broadband.
• 8:54
  Speaker 1: Great.
• 8:55
  Speaker 2: I think it's shitty that it doesn't raise tax, like
• 8:57
  Speaker 2: doesn't take away the Trump tax cuts at all. But
• 9:00
  Speaker 2: as long as it doesn't like, you know, raise the
• 9:02
  Speaker 2: gas tax, which was floating around, I think that it again,
• 9:04
  Speaker 2: it's a it's a it's a fine proposal. We need infrastructure.
• 9:07
  Speaker 1: Great.
• 9:08
  Speaker 2: But it is woefully insufficient. All of Joe Biden's other
• 9:10
  Speaker 2: priorities are just sitting out there. They need to go
• 9:13
  Speaker 2: into a second reconciliation bill. My belief here is that
• 9:18
  Speaker 2: once again, Joe Manchin is in the houseboat driver's seat
• 9:22
  Speaker 2: because I think what's going to happen. So he said
• 9:25
  Speaker 2: yesterday when he said he wouldn't commit to the reconciliation bill,
• 9:28
  Speaker 2: it's not that he doesn't. want to commit to the
• 9:31
  Speaker 2: concept of a Democrats only reconciliation bill. It's that he
• 9:34
  Speaker 2: doesn't want to commit to the substance of it before
• 9:36
  Speaker 2: he knows what the substance is, which honestly I get, right?
• 9:40
  Speaker 2: Like if you're Joe Manchin, you're not going to say like, yeah,
• 9:43
  Speaker 2: no matter what you guys put together, you can count
• 9:46
  Speaker 2: on me for a yes, right?
• 9:47
  Speaker 1: It's insane.
• 9:48
  Speaker 2: I mean, I would say that if I was a
• 9:49
  Speaker 2: Democrat Senator, but this is Joe Manchin we're talking about.
• 9:51
  Speaker 2: He's a centrist. He's not going to do that. No
• 9:53
  Speaker 2: one should expect him that he's going to do that.
• 9:55
  Speaker 2: He said the other day, I'd like to see a
• 9:56
  Speaker 2: good piece of legislation, and I think we can all
• 9:58
  Speaker 2: start working on it now. I'm not opposed to doing
• 10:01
  Speaker 2: anything that's going to help our country. Absolutely not opposed.
• 10:03
  Speaker 2: Just need to see something. So it does sound like
• 10:06
  Speaker 2: what Manchin's going to do here is really push for
• 10:09
  Speaker 2: this bipartisan deal to get done. If a bunch of
• 10:11
  Speaker 2: Democrats fall off and he needs to make up for
• 10:13
  Speaker 2: their votes by getting a bunch of Republicans on board,
• 10:16
  Speaker 2: he'll try to do that, get Biden to sign a
• 10:18
  Speaker 2: bipartisan deal, and then basically shape the reconciliation only bill
• 10:23
  Speaker 2: to as much money as Joe Manchin feels comfortable spending.
• 10:26
  Speaker 2: And he'll get away with that too, because you need
• 10:28
  Speaker 2: Joe Manchin's vote to pass a reconciliation bill. I mean,
• 10:31
  Speaker 2: does this seem right?
• 10:32
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 10:32
  Speaker 1: I mean, I think that is the hope. But the
• 10:36
  Speaker 1: other thing that's happening here is the clock is ticking.
• 10:40
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: We have, there is no deal. There is no legislative language.
• 10:43
  Speaker 1: There is no bill on even on this bipartisan thing.
• 10:46
  Speaker 1: And it is now the middle of June. Congress takes
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: August off. They take off like seven to 10 days
• 10:54
  Speaker 1: in July.
• 10:55
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 10:56
  Speaker 1: And so we, there is no, when are these things
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: going to happen? Right. We also have to save democracy
• 11:03
  Speaker 1: in the interim, which I know we'll get to. So
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: like they are burning clock on the Democrats and that those,
• 11:10
  Speaker 1: every one of those days matter. We say this all
• 11:11
  Speaker 1: the time. You never get a second wasted back in
• 11:14
  Speaker 1: a presidency. The election still happens at the same time
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: on the same day. And so if you spend six
• 11:21
  Speaker 1: weeks on a bipartisan bill that does not happen or
• 11:22
  Speaker 1: is woefully insufficient, that's six weeks you didn't spend on
• 11:26
  Speaker 1: the American Families Plan, the American Jobs Plan, the For
• 11:28
  Speaker 1: the People Act, a wide array of other things you
• 11:31
  Speaker 1: could be doing. And there was a story in Politico
• 11:34
  Speaker 1: the other day about what the Republican strategy was here,
• 11:37
  Speaker 1: which I think is pretty fascinating in a couple of ways,
• 11:39
  Speaker 1: which is– because you sort of wonder. It's like, McConnell
• 11:41
  Speaker 1: said he wants Biden to be a one-term president. John Barrasso,
• 11:44
  Speaker 1: who is actually a real person, I did make that up,
• 11:47
  Speaker 1: said that he wants Biden to be a half-term president,
• 11:50
  Speaker 1: which I assume is somehow related to Trump's pending reinstatement.
• 11:53
  Speaker 1: And so you're saying, well, if you think that, then
• 11:56
  Speaker 1: why are you working on a trillion-dollar economic bill with
• 12:02
  Speaker 1: the president? And the reasoning in the story was the
• 12:07
  Speaker 1: Republicans seem quite confident they're not going to get Manchin back.
• 12:10
  Speaker 1: the Republicans seem quite confident that Manchin and Sinema are
• 12:12
  Speaker 1: not going to be for a big reconciliation bill, whether
• 12:15
  Speaker 1: they're right or wrong, who knows. But they do believe
• 12:17
  Speaker 1: that this bipartisan, both in terms of eating up the
• 12:19
  Speaker 1: clock and getting something done, makes it less likely that
• 12:24
  Speaker 1: Biden will get a huge deal. And it says a
• 12:26
  Speaker 1: lot about how Republicans think about politics, because sort of
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: in the traditional Washington way, you would think a big
• 12:34
  Speaker 1: bipartisan infrastructure bill would be a huge political boon to Democrats.
• 12:38
  Speaker 1: But that's not what McConnell thinks. What McConnell thinks is
• 12:41
  Speaker 1: a bipartisan deal is a price worth paying to prevent
• 12:46
  Speaker 1: them from doing a bunch of things that would really
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: deliver for people and make the Democratic base happy. And
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: I think that is a real window into what the
• 12:54
  Speaker 1: risks of this are.
• 12:57
  Speaker 2: I think the Republicans are wrong about this, but I
• 12:59
  Speaker 2: think that the real challenge for the reconciliation bill here,
• 13:01
  Speaker 2: which we haven't talked much about because it's always like
• 13:03
  Speaker 2: in the background, everyone like, oh, we'll do everything else
• 13:05
  Speaker 2: in the second reconciliation bill, is that while you can
• 13:09
  Speaker 2: lose some Democratic votes on the bipartisan infrastructure bill, if
• 13:13
  Speaker 2: you make it up with Republicans, we need just about
• 13:16
  Speaker 2: every Democrat in Congress and the House and the Senate
• 13:19
  Speaker 2: to agree on whatever's in this reconciliation bill. And like
• 13:22
  Speaker 2: that Democratic source told CNN, everyone's looking at this bill
• 13:26
  Speaker 2: to include like 40 years of Democratic priorities. We got climate.
• 13:29
  Speaker 2: We got education. We got housing. We got health care.
• 13:31
  Speaker 2: Bernie wants prescription drugs. We got tax increases on the rich.
• 13:35
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 13:35
  Speaker 2: Like this is everything. And so this is a bill
• 13:37
  Speaker 2: where you either have AOC and the House progressives agreeing
• 13:42
  Speaker 2: with Joe Manchin on the bill, all of them together,
• 13:46
  Speaker 2: or we don't get anything done. And Joe Biden's and
• 13:48
  Speaker 2: the Democrats biggest priorities just don't happen. So like for
• 13:52
  Speaker 2: all the maneuvering and all the confusing stuff here, all
• 13:54
  Speaker 2: you need to know about the second reconciliation bill is
• 13:56
  Speaker 2: AOC and Joe Manchin have to agree on it or
• 13:58
  Speaker 2: else nothing gets done. That's where we are. How do
• 14:03
  Speaker 2: you think Joe Biden should play this? How do you
• 14:05
  Speaker 2: think the White House can help here?
• 14:06
  Speaker 1: You know, there are a whole bunch of stories today
• 14:08
  Speaker 1: that are like Biden returns home with a big decision.
• 14:12
  Speaker 1: Does he get behind reconciliation or bipartisan talks? No, that's
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: not how it works. He needs to do what he
• 14:18
  Speaker 1: has been doing and what I think Schumer is doing,
• 14:19
  Speaker 1: which is could get this going on two tracks. Sanders
• 14:24
  Speaker 1: seems very confident. You hear Bernie Sanders. He seems very
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: productive and pretty optimistic about what can happen here, and
• 14:30
  Speaker 1: he should start his reconciliation process. We should keep doing
• 14:33
  Speaker 1: the bipartisan thing. Steve Reschetti, who's one of Biden's top advisors,
• 14:38
  Speaker 1: met with– some group of members recently, it was reported
• 14:42
  Speaker 1: that he said that Biden was going to give this
• 14:44
  Speaker 1: seven to 10 days, whether it'll really be seven to
• 14:46
  Speaker 1: 10 days. I don't know. We've, we've crossed multiple deadlines
• 14:49
  Speaker 1: in the infrastructure talks, which is something that I think
• 14:52
  Speaker 1: probably makes Mitch McConnell smile. If he were to, if
• 14:54
  Speaker 1: you're a human being capable of smiling. Um, but the
• 14:58
  Speaker 1: right thing to do is keep this going on two
• 14:59
  Speaker 1: tracks and, and, and show openness to both tracks to
• 15:04
  Speaker 1: keep everyone on board. I don't think you have to
• 15:06
  Speaker 1: pick one path right now. Yeah.
• 15:09
  Speaker 2: So also on Wednesday, um, Joe Manchin came down from
• 15:13
  Speaker 2: the mountain with a tablet of provisions on voting rights
• 15:15
  Speaker 2: and election reform that his highness deems acceptable. That those
• 15:20
  Speaker 2: include banning partisan gerrymandering, at least two weeks of early voting,
• 15:24
  Speaker 2: automatic voter registration through the DMV, making election day a
• 15:28
  Speaker 2: national holiday and forcing super PACs to disclose their donors.
• 15:32
  Speaker 2: But Manchin also wants to require voter ID with allowable
• 15:36
  Speaker 2: alternatives like utility bills. He doesn't want to require no
• 15:40
  Speaker 2: excuse mail-in voting. And he doesn't want public financing of campaigns.
• 15:44
  Speaker 2: So also breaking news from this morning, Stacey Abrams said
• 15:48
  Speaker 2: on CNN that she supports this compromise. Why do you
• 15:51
  Speaker 2: think she does? What do you think of the compromise?
• 15:54
  Speaker 2: And should Chuck Schumer and the Democrats put this compromise
• 15:57
  Speaker 2: version of the For the People Act on the Senate
• 15:59
  Speaker 2: floor for a vote?
• 16:02
  Speaker 1: I imagine that Stacey Abrams supports this compromise because it
• 16:07
  Speaker 1: wouldn't solve every problem. It might even create a few,
• 16:10
  Speaker 1: but it deals with some of the bigger challenges we
• 16:12
  Speaker 1: currently have. And most importantly in there is partisan gerrymandering.
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: Partisan gerrymandering is a 10-year problem that makes all the
• 16:20
  Speaker 1: other things we care about, voter ID, voter suppression, everything
• 16:23
  Speaker 1: else so much worse. And so if you could do
• 16:25
  Speaker 1: something right here, right now to deal with partisan gerrymandering,
• 16:27
  Speaker 1: which would increase Democrats' chances of winning the House, would
• 16:31
  Speaker 1: make Congress more representative, would be a huge, that is
• 16:34
  Speaker 1: a 10-year solution. And there is no other solution to this, right?
• 16:37
  Speaker 1: The Supreme Court does not believe that partisan gerrymandering is
• 16:40
  Speaker 1: a justiciable issue. They think that the only way to win,
• 16:44
  Speaker 1: the only way to deal with rigged districts is to
• 16:46
  Speaker 1: win in rigged districts, which is a particularly stupid way
• 16:49
  Speaker 1: of thinking. And so, yeah, it's not awesome for sure.
• 16:53
  Speaker 1: No one wants to be for voter ID. It is
• 16:56
  Speaker 1: a policy that is racist in intent and often in practice,
• 17:00
  Speaker 1: and almost always in practice. But if you were to
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: have to make some trades to get something done, That
• 17:07
  Speaker 1: is a trade that I think he would make every
• 17:08
  Speaker 1: single time. So that's Stacey Abrams.
• 17:10
  Speaker 2: Which again, we have to make trades to get something
• 17:12
  Speaker 2: done on this. There is no world where for the
• 17:15
  Speaker 2: people passes as is.
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: No world.
• 17:19
  Speaker 2: Joe Manchin has a vote. You might hate it. He's annoying.
• 17:22
  Speaker 2: Lives in a houseboat. He's got a fucking vote in
• 17:24
  Speaker 2: the Senate. He's told us a million times he's not
• 17:26
  Speaker 2: voting for it as is. So get it out of
• 17:28
  Speaker 2: your heads that it's going to pass as it is.
• 17:30
  Speaker 2: It's not.
• 17:31
  Speaker 1: It feels to me like you were taking a real
• 17:32
  Speaker 1: risk and we're about to get some real blowback from
• 17:34
  Speaker 1: houseboat people who probably have a huge voice on Twitter
• 17:37
  Speaker 1: that we're unaware of. Like this is a constituency you've
• 17:39
  Speaker 1: repeatedly attacked.
• 17:40
  Speaker 2: Please bring it. I'll take it. I'll take all the
• 17:43
  Speaker 2: criticism on the houseboat people.
• 17:45
  Speaker 1: Once when I worked in the White House, I made
• 17:46
  Speaker 1: a joke about the funding in some Republican bill for
• 17:53
  Speaker 1: the Davis Cup. No, not the Davis Cup. What's the
• 17:55
  Speaker 1: sailing thing? America's Cup. I made a joke about funding
• 17:59
  Speaker 1: for the America's Cup and the sailing yacht community wrote
• 18:03
  Speaker 1: letters to the White House. I had to do a
• 18:04
  Speaker 1: phone call with someone. It was very disturbing. Anyhow, that's
• 18:07
  Speaker 1: neither here nor there. Yes, they should put it on
• 18:10
  Speaker 1: the floor because the only way we're going to have
• 18:12
  Speaker 1: a chance to actually have the conversation around the filibuster
• 18:16
  Speaker 1: is to get a bill that gets a majority of Democrats.
• 18:19
  Speaker 1: And that bill is whatever Joe Manchin wants it to be.
• 18:21
  Speaker 1: Like you say, that sucks. We should have won more
• 18:23
  Speaker 1: Senate races, but that is the world in which we live.
• 18:24
  Speaker 1: So I think you have to do that. Schumer hinted
• 18:26
  Speaker 1: at that last night where he said that the– when
• 18:30
  Speaker 1: he was going through the calendar that the week of
• 18:32
  Speaker 1: June 21st or whatever it is would be the For
• 18:36
  Speaker 1: the People Act. But that could be a placeholder for
• 18:39
  Speaker 1: some sort of agreement.
• 18:40
  Speaker 2: Compromise legislation.
• 18:41
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 18:42
  Speaker 2: Two things on voter ID. One, Dave Weigel had a
• 18:45
  Speaker 2: good point about this from The Washington Post on Twitter yesterday.
• 18:48
  Speaker 2: He said– it will be a good deal for House
• 18:50
  Speaker 2: Democrats because many of them have won in states with
• 18:53
  Speaker 2: voter ID requirements. If you chop up their districts with gerrymandering,
• 18:57
  Speaker 2: they can't win, which I think really sums it up.
• 19:02
  Speaker 2: Tim Kaine said yesterday that he was talking to Manchin
• 19:05
  Speaker 2: about this. And he said that Manchin being for requiring
• 19:09
  Speaker 2: voter ID, but allowing a lot of exceptions like presenting
• 19:13
  Speaker 2: utility bills would actually help in states that currently have
• 19:17
  Speaker 2: really restrictive voter ID laws. The problem would be states
• 19:20
  Speaker 2: that don't have any voter ID whatsoever right now, then
• 19:23
  Speaker 2: it would suddenly become more onerous for them because you
• 19:26
  Speaker 2: have like a blue state that doesn't have voter ID
• 19:27
  Speaker 2: and they would have to set up voter ID. So
• 19:29
  Speaker 2: he said he was talking to Manchin about somehow not
• 19:33
  Speaker 2: forcing states that don't currently have voter ID to have them.
• 19:36
  Speaker 2: So I do think that's something to keep in mind.
• 19:39
  Speaker 2: I think the real question is, Does even Manchin's compromise
• 19:43
  Speaker 2: get any Republican votes at all? Because Manchin told reporters
• 19:48
  Speaker 2: on Wednesday that he's still not budging on the filibuster
• 19:51
  Speaker 2: because he believes he can get 60 votes for this
• 19:53
  Speaker 2: compromise and quote you should not pass any type of
• 19:55
  Speaker 2: a voter bill in the most divisive time of our
• 19:57
  Speaker 2: life unless you have some unity on this thing but
• 20:01
  Speaker 2: this is a huge but The Intercept got leaked audio
• 20:05
  Speaker 2: of a Zoom call Manchin did with the centrist group
• 20:07
  Speaker 2: No Labels and a bunch of billionaires. Literally no one
• 20:10
  Speaker 2: I'd rather meet with less. Zoom or no Zoom. And
• 20:14
  Speaker 2: in this leaked audio, Manchin said that he's in favor
• 20:17
  Speaker 2: of requiring at least 41 senators to show up for
• 20:20
  Speaker 2: a filibuster, that he's open to lowering the filibuster threshold
• 20:24
  Speaker 2: from 60 to 55. that he's open to filibuster reform
• 20:28
  Speaker 2: in general, as long as people know that he's not
• 20:30
  Speaker 2: open to getting rid of the filibuster. Manchin was asked
• 20:34
  Speaker 2: about this leaked audio, and he responded by asking a reporter,
• 20:37
  Speaker 2: who in the hell is The Intercept? But like, I
• 20:41
  Speaker 2: feel like that part of the story, cause there's all,
• 20:43
  Speaker 2: you know, there's all these stories about the leaked audio
• 20:45
  Speaker 2: and he says a whole bunch of other things. And
• 20:48
  Speaker 2: of course he's meeting with billionaires. So that's gets a
• 20:49
  Speaker 2: lot of headlines too. But the news about what he's
• 20:52
  Speaker 2: open to on filibuster reform seemed huge to me and
• 20:55
  Speaker 2: kind of buried. I mean, is that hope I feel?
• 20:57
  Speaker 2: Am I just, what's going on?
• 20:59
  Speaker 1: Did you watch the NBA playoffs last night, John?
• 21:02
  Speaker 2: I didn't know. I was preparing for this pod, Dan.
• 21:05
  Speaker 1: Well, I should have been because, um, The Philadelphia 76ers
• 21:09
  Speaker 1: blew a 26-point lead and basically sank their entire season.
• 21:11
  Speaker 1: So no, I don't feel hope.
• 21:12
  Speaker 2: I did see the headline about that.
• 21:14
  Speaker 1: Yeah. My message to everyone, take it from the people
• 21:18
  Speaker 1: of Philadelphia. Do not feel hope. It hurts. We should
• 21:24
  Speaker 1: note just the other thing that Manchin said in there
• 21:25
  Speaker 1: that has got a lot of attention and probably should
• 21:28
  Speaker 1: have told these billionaires to Offer Roy Blunt, the retiring
• 21:31
  Speaker 1: Republican senator, a job so that he'll vote for the
• 21:34
  Speaker 1: January 6th commission. It's just like.
• 21:36
  Speaker 2: Well, but even that was. So, yeah. Or he didn't
• 21:39
  Speaker 2: say offer a job, but he said, be nice.
• 21:41
  Speaker 3: Roy Blunt.
• 21:41
  Speaker 2: You might work with Roy Blunt someday. Be nice to him.
• 21:44
  Speaker 2: Try to switch his vote on the 1-6 commission because
• 21:47
  Speaker 2: I need to prove to the left that bipartisanship can
• 21:51
  Speaker 2: work because then my argument about keeping the filibuster is stronger,
• 21:55
  Speaker 2: which is also very revealing about how Manchin thinks.
• 21:57
  Speaker 1: In all seriousness about hope, it is a hopeful statement.
• 22:01
  Speaker 1: They still think the odds are quite long and whether
• 22:02
  Speaker 1: a million miles of travel to get there, but his
• 22:05
  Speaker 1: private comments offer much more room to get something done
• 22:10
  Speaker 1: on the filibuster that might increase the chances of a
• 22:12
  Speaker 1: version of the For the People Act happening. Prior to
• 22:15
  Speaker 1: that phone call being leaked to The Intercept, the strongest belief,
• 22:20
  Speaker 1: based on what Manchin said, is there is no chance
• 22:21
  Speaker 1: for the filibuster, therefore there is no chance for the
• 22:23
  Speaker 1: For the People Act. this offers a different, more nuanced
• 22:27
  Speaker 1: view of that. So if you were someone who still
• 22:29
  Speaker 1: had the capacity for hope, this would be a reason
• 22:31
  Speaker 1: to feel it.
• 22:33
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I think what I'm looking for now is, does
• 22:36
  Speaker 2: he get even one Republican in the Senate for this compromise?
• 22:40
  Speaker 2: Because if Lisa Murkowski says yes, or Mitt Romney and
• 22:45
  Speaker 2: Susan Collins say, oh, I'm interested, I'll take a look
• 22:48
  Speaker 2: at it. Then you have a situation where you wonder, okay,
• 22:51
  Speaker 2: if Manchin can say, I got.
• 22:54
  Speaker 2: A couple Republicans. So it's bipartisan. And my stupid fucking
• 22:57
  Speaker 2: standard was it must be bipartisan.
• 23:00
  Speaker 3: Okay.
• 23:00
  Speaker 2: So even if you get one or two and it's bipartisan,
• 23:03
  Speaker 2: can you then say, all right, my two must haves are,
• 23:06
  Speaker 2: I want it to be bipartisan and I want to
• 23:07
  Speaker 2: keep the filibuster. Okay, fine. So if you get two
• 23:10
  Speaker 2: or three Republicans, can you make an exception for the
• 23:14
  Speaker 2: filibuster this time? Can you lower the threshold from 60
• 23:17
  Speaker 2: to whatever, however many Republicans you have, and then you
• 23:20
  Speaker 2: are true to your original statements that you want to
• 23:23
  Speaker 2: keep the filibuster and get some Republicans, but also you're
• 23:26
  Speaker 2: not going to get 10 Republicans for this compromise and
• 23:30
  Speaker 2: that's still okay. Like, so if I see one or
• 23:32
  Speaker 2: two Republicans come out and seem like they could be
• 23:35
  Speaker 2: in favor of this compromise, then I'll start feeling hope.
• 23:38
  Speaker 2: If you don't hear from any Republicans and everyone starts
• 23:40
  Speaker 2: shutting it down, like Mitch McConnell is speaking today, I'm
• 23:43
  Speaker 2: sure he'll come out against this compromise for sure. But
• 23:45
  Speaker 2: that's not what we're looking for. We're looking for a
• 23:48
  Speaker 2: couple of Senate Republicans to be interested in this, I think.
• 23:52
  Speaker 1: I think you might get some people who express vague
• 23:56
  Speaker 1: openness to the idea. Like once again, it's a one-page
• 23:59
  Speaker 1: Word document. It's not a bill. There's not legislation involved.
• 24:03
  Speaker 1: I just cannot imagine a world in which a single
• 24:06
  Speaker 1: Republican senator votes for a bill that includes a ban
• 24:09
  Speaker 1: on partisan gerrymandering.
• 24:12
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it seems like a long shot to me too.
• 24:15
  Speaker 1: I mean, as we said before, the Voting Rights Act
• 24:17
  Speaker 1: was gutted in 2013. There has been no effort. from
• 24:21
  Speaker 1: the Republicans, other than Lisa Murkowski, one person who has
• 24:25
  Speaker 1: a very specific and very narrow view of what you
• 24:27
  Speaker 1: should do, being for fixing a giant hole in American democracy.
• 24:33
  Speaker 2: Yeah, but I think the bottom line is there is
• 24:35
  Speaker 2: at least some daylight here. There is some opening. And
• 24:38
  Speaker 2: so I do think keeping up the pressure, you know,
• 24:41
  Speaker 2: not necessarily on the specific original version of H.R.1, but
• 24:45
  Speaker 2: keeping up pressure on everyone in Congress, especially Democrats, to
• 24:48
  Speaker 2: pass something to protect voting rights. and election reform, and
• 24:52
  Speaker 2: especially to stop partisan gerrymandering, which could cost us the House,
• 24:56
  Speaker 2: is really important to do. Because, you know, this is
• 25:00
  Speaker 2: still possible at this point. Today, President Biden signed a
• 25:11
  Speaker 2: law establishing June 19th is Juneteenth National Independence Day, a
• 25:15
  Speaker 2: new federal holiday to commemorate the end of slavery in
• 25:18
  Speaker 2: the United States. and a small but important step forward
• 25:20
  Speaker 2: for a country that's still reckoning with a dark history.
• 25:23
  Speaker 2: But even though all but 14 House Republicans voted for
• 25:26
  Speaker 2: the holiday, most of the party doesn't want our kids
• 25:28
  Speaker 2: to know why it exists. Since George Floyd's murder a
• 25:32
  Speaker 2: year ago, Republicans have labeled seemingly any attempt to educate
• 25:36
  Speaker 2: children about the legacy of slavery and the effects of
• 25:38
  Speaker 2: structural racism critical race theory. and are currently trying to
• 25:42
  Speaker 2: pass laws that would restrict such teaching in 21 states.
• 25:45
  Speaker 2: They've already succeeded in Oklahoma, Idaho, Iowa, and Tennessee. Texas
• 25:49
  Speaker 2: is about to sign a similar law. And just last week,
• 25:52
  Speaker 2: the Florida State Board of Education voted unanimously to ban
• 25:55
  Speaker 2: teaching critical race theory in Florida schools. Republicans in Congress
• 25:59
  Speaker 2: have also introduced a bill as well. Like all good
• 26:02
  Speaker 2: culture wars, this one started on Fox News, which has
• 26:05
  Speaker 2: mentioned critical race theory 1,300 times. in just the past
• 26:09
  Speaker 2: three and a half months. Take a listen. So this
• 26:12
  Speaker 2: is someone who's trying to hurt your children and attack
• 26:14
  Speaker 2: them on the basis of something they can't control, their
• 26:17
  Speaker 2: skin color. Correct.
• 26:18
  Speaker 1: Well said.
• 26:19
  Speaker 2: I think that critical race theory, especially when it's taught
• 26:21
  Speaker 2: to kids, Todd, is really a form of psychological slavery.
• 26:25
  Speaker 2: It is obviously aggressively, flamboyantly racist. I think cultish is
• 26:30
  Speaker 2: a really good way to talk about this.
• 26:32
  Speaker 1: That's what it is. This is indoctrinating kids.
• 26:35
  Speaker 2: Sean, thank you.
• 26:36
  Speaker 3: I just think it's inspiring that someone wasn't going to
• 26:39
  Speaker 3: let their kids be destroyed.
• 26:40
  Speaker 2: Joining us to talk about all this is New Yorker
• 26:43
  Speaker 2: staff writer and Columbia professor Jelani Cobb, who's called these
• 26:46
  Speaker 2: attacks on critical race theory, quote, an attempt to discredit
• 26:49
  Speaker 2: the literature millions of people sought out last year to
• 26:52
  Speaker 2: understand how George Floyd wound up dead on a street corner.
• 26:55
  Speaker 2: The goal is to leave the next dead black person
• 26:57
  Speaker 2: inexplicable by history. Jelani, welcome to the pod.
• 27:00
  Speaker 3: Thank you.
• 27:02
  Speaker 2: I think a lot of people who don't mainline Fox
• 27:05
  Speaker 2: all day hear about this controversy and ask themselves, what
• 27:10
  Speaker 2: is critical race theory? How did this whole thing start?
• 27:13
  Speaker 2: And what is actually happening in our schools? Would you
• 27:16
  Speaker 2: mind taking a stab at that for us?
• 27:17
  Speaker 3: I mean, those are gigantic questions, you know, because we
• 27:23
  Speaker 3: can start with the fact that what they're calling critical
• 27:26
  Speaker 3: race theory has nothing to do with what critical race
• 27:30
  Speaker 3: theory actually is. And then go beyond that to say
• 27:33
  Speaker 3: that no one's children were being taught critical race theory.
• 27:38
  Speaker 3: It is an academic field of study that predominantly, though
• 27:43
  Speaker 3: not exclusively, related to law and litigation. And so, as
• 27:50
  Speaker 3: I've been saying, unless your child was also taking torts
• 27:53
  Speaker 3: and contract law and advanced constitutional law in fifth grade,
• 28:01
  Speaker 3: they were not gonna encounter critical race theory in any classroom,
• 28:05
  Speaker 3: any textbook, any way. So there's that part of it.
• 28:09
  Speaker 3: But what's really kind of disturbing, and I also think
• 28:12
  Speaker 3: there's a tell attached to this, that all of the
• 28:15
  Speaker 3: people who are denouncing critical race theory have nothing to
• 28:20
  Speaker 3: say about the actual literature Because this is an academic
• 28:24
  Speaker 3: field of inquiry, there is a gigantic literature on critical
• 28:28
  Speaker 3: race theory. Nobody cites anything. No one makes reference. No
• 28:32
  Speaker 3: one quotes anyone. Even if some of this is dense
• 28:37
  Speaker 3: legal theory, no one is going around saying, well, in
• 28:40
  Speaker 3: this article, in this law journal, none of them have
• 28:43
  Speaker 3: any view of that whatsoever. Because they're not concerned with
• 28:47
  Speaker 3: critical race theory as an actual intellectual undertaking. They're interested
• 28:52
  Speaker 3: in it as a phrase that includes the radioactive word
• 28:56
  Speaker 3: race that they can use to construe white people as
• 29:00
  Speaker 3: the victims. And so they're saying kind of psychological enslavement.
• 29:05
  Speaker 3: That's astounding. You know, no one would want to be
• 29:08
  Speaker 3: subjected to enslavement of any sort. Oh, wait, about 40
• 29:13
  Speaker 3: million people in this country trace our ancestry back to
• 29:15
  Speaker 3: people who actually were enslaved. And so it's this kind
• 29:19
  Speaker 3: of bizarre inversion that we're seeing and is being used,
• 29:22
  Speaker 3: I suspect, for political purposes. When we look at what
• 29:26
  Speaker 3: happened last year with George Floyd, I think that the
• 29:31
  Speaker 3: shock of that sent people, as it should, sent people
• 29:36
  Speaker 3: to the archives, sent people to the bookstore, to the library.
• 29:40
  Speaker 3: to kind of find out what exactly did I not know?
• 29:44
  Speaker 3: What is the context? How did this happen? And what
• 29:48
  Speaker 3: is this related to? And that translated into a lot
• 29:52
  Speaker 3: of political activity. When people were saying, what can you
• 29:56
  Speaker 3: do to honor George Floyd's life? A lot of people said, vote.
• 30:01
  Speaker 3: That was the response that they took. And we saw
• 30:03
  Speaker 3: some element of that in November. And so in order
• 30:08
  Speaker 3: to curtail the impact of that and the validation of
• 30:15
  Speaker 3: a view of the centrality of race to American society,
• 30:20
  Speaker 3: they've gone after it and distorted it into something that's
• 30:23
  Speaker 3: completely unrecognizable.
• 30:26
  Speaker 2: It seems to me that what is happening in a
• 30:28
  Speaker 2: lot of schools is, you know, something else that happened
• 30:31
  Speaker 2: in the wake of George Floyd's murder is a lot
• 30:33
  Speaker 2: of educators and school districts and school boards and parents, too,
• 30:37
  Speaker 2: wanted to make sure that kids are learning about both
• 30:40
  Speaker 2: the legacy of slavery and the ongoing effects of systemic racism.
• 30:46
  Speaker 2: And that's what they're calling critical race theory sort of
• 30:49
  Speaker 2: as a catch-all just to make it seem scarier than saying, oh,
• 30:53
  Speaker 2: we're teaching our kids about racism. Right.
• 30:56
  Speaker 3: And so it also is part of a kind of
• 31:01
  Speaker 3: more established trend that was a little bit subtler before
• 31:05
  Speaker 3: this time in which the conversations between the right and
• 31:08
  Speaker 3: the left as it relates to race tend to break
• 31:10
  Speaker 3: down over how much racism there is in American society.
• 31:15
  Speaker 3: And on the right, people will grant that there are
• 31:19
  Speaker 3: a handful, like five people in the country who are
• 31:23
  Speaker 3: actually racist. And then, you know, on the left, people
• 31:28
  Speaker 3: are much more interested in talking about institutional practices. And
• 31:33
  Speaker 3: the kind of breakdown of the idea of saying that
• 31:35
  Speaker 3: systemic racism is just a non-starter for people. And this
• 31:39
  Speaker 3: was even back in the Trump era, you know, when
• 31:43
  Speaker 3: Jeff Sessions said that explicitly, that there was no such
• 31:45
  Speaker 3: thing as systemic racism in policing. Except that you then
• 31:50
  Speaker 3: have the confounding question of why you have all of
• 31:52
  Speaker 3: these racially aligned disparities in American institutions, in our housing institutions,
• 31:59
  Speaker 3: in our educational institutions, in our healthcare outcomes, in our lifetime,
• 32:05
  Speaker 3: in our life expectancy, in our lifetime earnings, in our
• 32:08
  Speaker 3: home values. We can kind of just walk through the
• 32:11
  Speaker 3: data and find institution after institution after institution that reflects
• 32:16
  Speaker 3: these bigger prevailing themes. And so it's really a kind
• 32:21
  Speaker 3: of saying, and of course, one of the points of
• 32:23
  Speaker 3: this is that if you move away from the idea
• 32:25
  Speaker 3: that there is a systemic problem with race in this country,
• 32:29
  Speaker 3: you simultaneously alleviate yourself from the responsibility of actually having
• 32:33
  Speaker 3: to do anything about it. If you just have like
• 32:36
  Speaker 3: one or two idiots who, an increasingly high barometer for
• 32:42
  Speaker 3: actually qualifying as a racist, But if there's like one
• 32:45
  Speaker 3: or two idiots who actually qualify, those are just people
• 32:48
  Speaker 3: to be ignored and we can just kind of go
• 32:50
  Speaker 3: on our merry way.
• 32:53
  Speaker 2: Dan, this is quickly becoming one of the Republican Party's
• 32:55
  Speaker 2: top strategies for winning the midterms. Right-wing media is all in.
• 32:59
  Speaker 2: Republican politicians are all in. NBCnews.com reported this week that
• 33:03
  Speaker 2: the group's targeting school boards are being funded by right-wing
• 33:06
  Speaker 2: think tank assholes, one of whom wrote... The goal is
• 33:10
  Speaker 2: to have the public read something crazy in the newspaper
• 33:13
  Speaker 2: and immediately think critical race theory. My question is, do
• 33:16
  Speaker 2: you think this is a strategy designed to excite the
• 33:18
  Speaker 2: Republican base, persuade swing voters, or both?
• 33:22
  Speaker 1: I think that's a bit of a false choice in
• 33:24
  Speaker 1: American politics right now. Because if we exist in a
• 33:29
  Speaker 1: world with a national popular vote, we're running a national referendum,
• 33:32
  Speaker 1: you have to choose between Republican base and quote unquote
• 33:35
  Speaker 1: swing voters. But here, in a world of the Electoral College,
• 33:39
  Speaker 1: Senate malapportionment, gerrymandered districts, it's base plus a little bit, right?
• 33:42
  Speaker 1: So American politics is a game of inches here. So
• 33:45
  Speaker 1: exciting the base is table stakes for what they have
• 33:47
  Speaker 1: to do. But Republicans have seen great success over the
• 33:52
  Speaker 1: long history of the party in doing this very thing,
• 33:55
  Speaker 1: which is ultimately– Republican politics has been about since the
• 33:59
  Speaker 1: Southern strategy about making white people scared about how a
• 34:04
  Speaker 1: multiracial– advances it towards a multiracial democracy affects their lives, right?
• 34:08
  Speaker 1: And particularly white Christian people, that the political power and
• 34:10
  Speaker 1: cultural dominance that they view as their birthright is under threat.
• 34:14
  Speaker 1: And the place where they've had the most success is
• 34:17
  Speaker 1: in schools, right? Because there are– they have had– whether
• 34:21
  Speaker 1: it was textbooks, busing, critical race theory. I mean, you
• 34:25
  Speaker 1: remember– President Obama was going to give a national address
• 34:27
  Speaker 1: to schools and Republicans went insane over this because they
• 34:31
  Speaker 1: thought he was going to indoctrinate their children. They believe
• 34:33
  Speaker 1: with some historical validation that there are a group of
• 34:39
  Speaker 1: moderate-ish white voters who are for these advances in civil
• 34:45
  Speaker 1: rights and dealing with systemic racism in theory, but in practice,
• 34:51
  Speaker 1: that is where the backlash happens and the place where
• 34:53
  Speaker 1: it happens in And the place where that is most
• 34:55
  Speaker 1: personal is in the schools when it relates to their children.
• 34:58
  Speaker 1: And so I think there is real political power here
• 35:02
  Speaker 1: for what Republicans are trying to achieve. I'm not saying
• 35:04
  Speaker 1: this is the strategy that's going to win them election
• 35:06
  Speaker 1: or the White House or whatever else. But it's easy
• 35:08
  Speaker 1: for Democrats to look at this and say, look at
• 35:09
  Speaker 1: all these polls that show that most people don't know
• 35:11
  Speaker 1: what it is. Or it's completely, as Jelani points out,
• 35:14
  Speaker 1: what they're saying is complete bullshit, right? It has no
• 35:16
  Speaker 1: bearing on reality. But too often, Democrats focus on facts
• 35:20
  Speaker 1: and Republicans focus on feeling. And there is, they are
• 35:23
  Speaker 1: sowing real insecurity and disorientation among voters by using these
• 35:29
  Speaker 1: buzzwords and using these, you know, very alarmist caricatures about,
• 35:35
  Speaker 1: and false representations of what's happening.
• 35:38
  Speaker 3: Can I add something to that, you know, about kind
• 35:41
  Speaker 3: of what the kind of meta dynamic of this is?
• 35:45
  Speaker 3: You know, if you talk about what critical race theory
• 35:49
  Speaker 3: actually is, they are literally following kind of what it prescribes.
• 35:55
  Speaker 3: It would be like telling someone, I think you have
• 35:57
  Speaker 3: a problem with violence, and they say, I have no
• 36:00
  Speaker 3: problem with violence, and for saying that, I'm going to
• 36:02
  Speaker 3: punch you in the face. So it's like that because
• 36:09
  Speaker 3: when the kind of core thinkers in the critical race
• 36:13
  Speaker 3: theory movement came to the fore, they were looking at
• 36:18
  Speaker 3: exactly this, the ways in which race could profitably be
• 36:24
  Speaker 3: used and in cynical ways and also to the detriment
• 36:30
  Speaker 3: of vulnerable communities, specifically communities of color, black people. And
• 36:36
  Speaker 3: to take this theory, this field of inquiry, trying to
• 36:40
  Speaker 3: study this dynamic and then do that, it's almost like
• 36:46
  Speaker 3: when you line up a mirror in front of a mirror,
• 36:48
  Speaker 3: And you can look at the reflection, bounce back like
• 36:50
  Speaker 3: into infinity. It's like they're doing that. It's like inception
• 36:54
  Speaker 3: of something. Because we're saying, you know, Derrick Bell, for instance,
• 37:00
  Speaker 3: one of the kind of cornerstone thinkers, was talking about this,
• 37:04
  Speaker 3: saying that even as we try to achieve a more
• 37:09
  Speaker 3: equitable and democratic society, we find people working to engineer
• 37:14
  Speaker 3: and re-engineer racial hierarchies such that they remain sustainable even
• 37:19
  Speaker 3: in the face of progressive reforms. And that's what happens.
• 37:24
  Speaker 3: We have this titanic turnout in 2020. A candidate of
• 37:30
  Speaker 3: choice is elected largely on the strength of African-American voters
• 37:35
  Speaker 3: as part of this very dynamic, multiracial, cross-class alliance that looks,
• 37:43
  Speaker 3: dare I say, democratic. Like democracy. And the reaction has
• 37:49
  Speaker 3: been precisely what Derrick Bell prescribed. What he was saying
• 37:53
  Speaker 3: was likely to happen in these kinds of situations.
• 37:56
  Speaker 2: So the NBC story has an anecdote that I think
• 37:59
  Speaker 2: illustrates the larger challenge here. Last year, a school board
• 38:03
  Speaker 2: in an extremely white, fairly blue suburb of Portland, Maine,
• 38:06
  Speaker 2: puts out a letter in the wake of George Floyd's
• 38:08
  Speaker 2: murder denouncing white supremacy. One parent reads the letter and
• 38:11
  Speaker 2: claims it says the entire community is filled with white supremacists.
• 38:15
  Speaker 2: And that leads to lawsuits, a Tucker Carlson segment, and
• 38:18
  Speaker 2: all these national groups descending on this little town, starting
• 38:21
  Speaker 2: a campaign to get the entire school board to resign
• 38:23
  Speaker 2: for supposedly pushing critical race theory. Of course, these schools
• 38:27
  Speaker 2: aren't teaching critical race theory and the letter doesn't call
• 38:29
  Speaker 2: everyone in the town white supremacists, but the letter does say, quote,
• 38:32
  Speaker 2: we will work to reassess our curriculum and dismantle the
• 38:36
  Speaker 2: anti-blackness all of us have internalized by living in a
• 38:39
  Speaker 2: society built on white supremacy. Now, because we're steeped in
• 38:44
  Speaker 2: the language of progressive politics and social justice. The three
• 38:47
  Speaker 2: of us are familiar and comfortable with this language. But
• 38:51
  Speaker 2: I'm wondering, how do you think this lands with your
• 38:53
  Speaker 2: typical apolitical set of suburban parents? And more importantly, what's
• 38:58
  Speaker 2: the most effective way to persuade those parents that we
• 39:01
  Speaker 2: should be teaching about the effects of structural racism, knowing
• 39:05
  Speaker 2: that the right will say it's all about teaching kids
• 39:07
  Speaker 2: to hate white people and hate America?
• 39:09
  Speaker 3: Jelani, do you have thoughts? That's a really good point.
• 39:13
  Speaker 3: I would not, politically speaking, have written that letter because
• 39:17
  Speaker 3: you know how a letter like that is going to land,
• 39:19
  Speaker 3: and it's almost predictable. And I have conversations with people
• 39:23
  Speaker 3: who legitimately– first of all, we're a very ahistorical society.
• 39:28
  Speaker 3: You know, we don't know fundamental things about our government
• 39:31
  Speaker 3: or about our founders. As you know, I was talking
• 39:34
  Speaker 3: with a filmmaker recently and saying that most people who
• 39:39
  Speaker 3: are diehard Democrats can't point you to how the Democratic
• 39:43
  Speaker 3: Party came into existence. Nor can most Republicans. you know,
• 39:47
  Speaker 3: we don't even know the origins of the parties we
• 39:50
  Speaker 3: vote for in these ways. So not understanding the way
• 39:54
  Speaker 3: that anti-blackness is baked into the structures of American society
• 40:00
  Speaker 3: is par for the course. And I don't even set
• 40:03
  Speaker 3: that apart from a general kind of historical ignorance. I
• 40:07
  Speaker 3: would have parsed that language differently. That said, you know,
• 40:11
  Speaker 3: I think that You know, Tucker Carlson and Fox News
• 40:14
  Speaker 3: and the rest of the people who are operating so
• 40:15
  Speaker 3: cynically in that context know exactly what they're doing. And
• 40:20
  Speaker 3: they likely do know. They have had these arguments and
• 40:23
  Speaker 3: had people on their shows and so on. They know
• 40:26
  Speaker 3: exactly where people are coming from with this and I
• 40:29
  Speaker 3: think are cynically trying to exploit it.
• 40:31
  Speaker 2: Well, I mean, and this is a question for you too, Dan.
• 40:33
  Speaker 2: Like what's the best way, knowing that this is going
• 40:36
  Speaker 2: to happen, knowing that these attacks are out there, that Republicans,
• 40:38
  Speaker 2: as Jelani said, are going to cynically use this over
• 40:41
  Speaker 2: and over again and sort of twist these words. Like
• 40:43
  Speaker 2: what's the best way for Democrats and progressives and activists
• 40:46
  Speaker 2: to handle sort of this Republican war on educating kids
• 40:50
  Speaker 2: about racism?
• 40:54
  Speaker 1: A couple things here. The first is, I do think
• 40:56
  Speaker 1: it's one other point to make about why this is
• 40:59
  Speaker 1: such an imperative for Republicans. Part of it is they
• 41:01
  Speaker 1: are desperately looking for their new version of the Tea Party.
• 41:03
  Speaker 1: They've got to fire people up. Biden doesn't get their
• 41:05
  Speaker 1: folks worked up like Barack Obama so unsubtly did. But
• 41:10
  Speaker 1: there is a bigger existential threat to Republicans from the
• 41:15
  Speaker 1: conversation that came out of George Floyd's murder, which is
• 41:18
  Speaker 1: conservatism is about maintaining an old order and an old
• 41:21
  Speaker 1: power structure. And when you have a big conversation about
• 41:25
  Speaker 1: the tremendous flaws and cruelty that went into that power structure,
• 41:30
  Speaker 1: it becomes very problematic, right? It actually raises the question
• 41:33
  Speaker 1: of whether you really want to make America great again
• 41:35
  Speaker 1: because of what that means. But the problem here is
• 41:38
  Speaker 1: you just can't– and Republicans weaponize this all the time.
• 41:42
  Speaker 1: We just can't live in a world where we are
• 41:43
  Speaker 1: going to convince apolitical, well-meaning school administrators and teachers around
• 41:48
  Speaker 1: the country to all adhere to a set of less–
• 41:52
  Speaker 1: easily demagoguable language. Right.
• 41:54
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 41:54
  Speaker 1: Like it's just, we can't like, there's just no way
• 41:56
  Speaker 1: that's going to happen. These people are, they're incredibly well-meaning.
• 41:58
  Speaker 1: They're trying to do the right thing. They have no
• 42:01
  Speaker 1: expectation that the letter they write to their town in
• 42:04
  Speaker 1: Maine is going to end up on Fox news.
• 42:05
  Speaker 2: Right.
• 42:05
  Speaker 1: That is this sort of where we are. So I
• 42:07
  Speaker 1: don't have like, that's not a problem we can solve.
• 42:10
  Speaker 1: I think there is a way to talk about this overall,
• 42:15
  Speaker 1: which is to take a step back and ascribe motivation
• 42:19
  Speaker 1: to the the cynical people, whether it's Tucker Carlson or
• 42:23
  Speaker 1: some of these local activists, for what they are trying
• 42:25
  Speaker 1: to do. And the folks, and not Shankar Asario, and
• 42:27
  Speaker 1: the folks behind the Race Class Narrative have put together
• 42:29
  Speaker 1: a messaging memo on this for local officials to talk
• 42:34
  Speaker 1: about why the, about, to call it out what it
• 42:37
  Speaker 1: is and why these politicians are trying to divide us.
• 42:39
  Speaker 1: And they very, I think, smartly focus the motivation is
• 42:45
  Speaker 1: to continue, is they put it back in schools to
• 42:46
  Speaker 1: say these are the same, because they're really talking about
• 42:48
  Speaker 1: local politicians. The city council members, the state legislators are
• 42:52
  Speaker 1: trying to ban critical race theory or ban the 1619
• 42:55
  Speaker 1: Project or whatever that is and say, this is never
• 42:58
  Speaker 1: to divide us. They continue to starve our schools of
• 43:00
  Speaker 1: the resources that we need. And all we're trying to
• 43:02
  Speaker 1: do is give an accurate rendering of history. And so
• 43:05
  Speaker 1: there is language to use I think is most effective.
• 43:07
  Speaker 1: But we have to recognize that there's not– letters like
• 43:11
  Speaker 1: that are going to continue to happen throughout time. And
• 43:14
  Speaker 1: there's a massive conservative apparatus to go find those things
• 43:17
  Speaker 1: and then turn them into giant stories.
• 43:21
  Speaker 2: What do you think? I mean, one thought I had
• 43:23
  Speaker 2: is I don't even know that we should buy into
• 43:25
  Speaker 2: their framing and call it critical race theory because it's
• 43:28
  Speaker 2: their frame and it's not actually what is being taught,
• 43:30
  Speaker 2: as you pointed out.
• 43:32
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 43:32
  Speaker 3: I mean, I think that there is an importance of
• 43:36
  Speaker 3: having these conversations, you know, just on the kind of
• 43:41
  Speaker 3: specific part of it as a person with a background
• 43:44
  Speaker 3: in American history. I'm inclined to say we have like
• 43:47
  Speaker 3: founding documents. So we have documents that point to these
• 43:50
  Speaker 3: various things. So we need to talk about that. We
• 43:53
  Speaker 3: should talk about the constitution, the whole constitution, which means
• 43:56
  Speaker 3: we need to talk about the three fifths clause. We
• 43:58
  Speaker 3: need to talk about the protection of the transatlantic slave trade.
• 44:01
  Speaker 3: We need to talk about the fugitive slave clause. We
• 44:05
  Speaker 3: need to talk about the electoral college. And so these
• 44:09
  Speaker 3: things and the debates over the electoral college, this is not,
• 44:13
  Speaker 3: you know, some committee of woke activists who are writing
• 44:19
  Speaker 3: this into history. If you go back and read the
• 44:21
  Speaker 3: debates around the Constitution and the fights over the Electoral College,
• 44:26
  Speaker 3: it's explicit in there that what this is doing is
• 44:30
  Speaker 3: creating a mechanism to give more political power to Southern
• 44:33
  Speaker 3: white people by literally using the bodies of people they
• 44:37
  Speaker 3: were holding in slavery. And so I think that there's
• 44:41
  Speaker 3: a way that you can get at this by simply
• 44:43
  Speaker 3: pointing people to the original documents, which are, I think,
• 44:48
  Speaker 3: less impeachable than, you know, people who've subsequently done things.
• 44:52
  Speaker 3: They'll be on your Twitter feed in a minute declaring
• 44:55
  Speaker 3: you a Marxist, you know, if you're making these arguments.
• 44:58
  Speaker 3: You're like, wait, no, that's not me. That's John Jay,
• 45:00
  Speaker 3: you know? I think that's one part of it.
• 45:05
  Speaker 2: I mean, I also think... I think it's important to
• 45:08
  Speaker 2: not allow them to not cede sort of the mantle
• 45:12
  Speaker 2: of patriotism to them, because one thing that they're trying
• 45:14
  Speaker 2: to do is say that critical race theory is anti-American.
• 45:18
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 45:19
  Speaker 2: And this is about hating your country. And Nicole Hannah-Jones
• 45:22
  Speaker 2: has obviously been one of the main targets of this
• 45:24
  Speaker 2: from the right. You know, she tweeted the other day,
• 45:27
  Speaker 2: she quoted the 1619 Project verbatim. Black people have seen
• 45:31
  Speaker 2: the worst of America, yet somehow we still believe in
• 45:33
  Speaker 2: its best. Despite being violently denied the freedom and justice
• 45:36
  Speaker 2: promised to all, Black Americans believed fervently in the American creed.
• 45:40
  Speaker 2: And I do wonder if part of this is sort
• 45:41
  Speaker 2: of reclaiming what patriotism and allegiance to America actually means,
• 45:47
  Speaker 2: which is an allegiance to an ideal that was set out,
• 45:50
  Speaker 2: as you said, in those founding documents that we have
• 45:53
  Speaker 2: never been able to live up to. Right.
• 45:55
  Speaker 3: And I think that that's the point. What we're really
• 45:58
  Speaker 3: talking about, I think, are two different conceptions of exceptionalism
• 46:02
  Speaker 3: like one set of people think that we're exceptional just
• 46:05
  Speaker 3: because we're so fucking phenomenal like like we we kicked
• 46:12
  Speaker 3: hitler's ass and we have this this unbroken chain well
• 46:16
  Speaker 3: mostly unbroken chain of peaceful elections we have all those
• 46:20
  Speaker 3: things that we've done you know we're the greatest you
• 46:23
  Speaker 3: know example of democracy blah blah blah blah blah And
• 46:27
  Speaker 3: other people have a more, I think, complicated and enduring
• 46:32
  Speaker 3: sense of being exceptional in saying that we are flawed,
• 46:36
  Speaker 3: but we have again and again and again tried to
• 46:40
  Speaker 3: be better. And, you know, when I was talking, I
• 46:43
  Speaker 3: was talking with a group of students and kind of
• 46:44
  Speaker 3: jokingly said, In any other context, we willingly adopt this
• 46:49
  Speaker 3: idea of Americans being people who don't always get it right,
• 46:52
  Speaker 3: but we are distinguished by our willingness to keep trying.
• 46:56
  Speaker 3: That's why Rocky was such an icon. Like Rocky gets
• 46:59
  Speaker 3: knocked down in every round of every fight. It's like, oh,
• 47:04
  Speaker 3: round one, Rocky's on canvas. Round two, Rocky's on the canvas.
• 47:09
  Speaker 3: It was like, but over the course of this, you
• 47:11
  Speaker 3: get to understand that what makes him heroic is the
• 47:13
  Speaker 3: fact that this dude will never stay down. And I
• 47:16
  Speaker 3: think that that is an actually inspiring conception of saying
• 47:23
  Speaker 3: that this is a society that was conceived in these
• 47:26
  Speaker 3: titanically flawed ways, reaching for this ideal, falling far short
• 47:32
  Speaker 3: of it. And then subsequent generations of people whose names
• 47:36
  Speaker 3: we don't know, some of whom, you Because they were
• 47:41
  Speaker 3: trying to burnish this ideal into something that was usable
• 47:45
  Speaker 3: for future generations. Like, that is exceptional. And that's amazing.
• 47:50
  Speaker 3: But that's not what we get. It's you hate America,
• 47:53
  Speaker 3: you know. Right.
• 47:55
  Speaker 2: It's like telling your.
• 47:56
  Speaker 3: Doctor he hates you because he diagnosed you with blood pressure.
• 47:59
  Speaker 3: It was like high blood pressure. No, no, actually, I
• 48:02
  Speaker 3: really want you to stick around. That's why I'm telling
• 48:04
  Speaker 3: you this.
• 48:07
  Speaker 2: OK, well, we will end on that note. Jelani, thank
• 48:10
  Speaker 2: you so much for coming on Pod Save America. When
• 48:12
  Speaker 2: we come back, we'll talk about all the media's hyping
• 48:15
  Speaker 2: and griping surrounding Joe Biden's blockbuster summit with Vladimir Putin. OK, Biden, Putin.
• 48:30
  Speaker 2: Ahead of the summit, here's a sample, Dan, of the
• 48:32
  Speaker 2: media coverage. This set of questions was published by Politico.
• 48:37
  Speaker 2: Will the two men face off like boxers ahead of
• 48:39
  Speaker 2: a match? Will Putin tear off his shirt? Will there
• 48:42
  Speaker 2: be smiles and elbow bumps or lectures and jaw clenching?
• 48:47
  Speaker 2: Hard to believe, but the actual meeting did not live
• 48:49
  Speaker 2: up to that hype. Biden did leave the summit saying
• 48:52
  Speaker 2: that the tone was, quote, good, positive and, quote, I
• 48:55
  Speaker 2: did what I came to do. Putin said, quote, there
• 48:57
  Speaker 2: has been no hostility. and said the meeting took place in, quote,
• 49:01
  Speaker 2: constructive spirit. The two leaders agreed to begin negotiations on
• 49:05
  Speaker 2: nuclear talks, return each other's ambassadors back to their posts,
• 49:09
  Speaker 2: and to work on specific understandings on what's off limits
• 49:13
  Speaker 2: when it comes to cyber attacks, though Biden did threaten
• 49:16
  Speaker 2: to retaliate in the future, saying we have significant cyber
• 49:19
  Speaker 2: capability and he knows it. What did you think of
• 49:24
  Speaker 2: the media hype over the summit versus the actual outcome?
• 49:29
  Speaker 2: And do you think the Biden folks are happy with
• 49:30
  Speaker 2: the outcome?
• 49:32
  Speaker 1: The way this played out in the media is just
• 49:34
  Speaker 1: a reminder that so much of political media is about
• 49:39
  Speaker 1: making the ordinary seem interesting and interesting seem exciting, right?
• 49:42
  Speaker 1: Which is why it has to be discussed. Obviously those
• 49:44
  Speaker 1: political questions are in jest. I don't imagine there's anyone
• 49:46
  Speaker 1: at Politico who thought Putin might actually disrobe in this meeting, but.
• 49:50
  Speaker 2: Much of it, but they- Hard to tell, Dan, hard
• 49:52
  Speaker 2: to tell.
• 49:54
  Speaker 1: Fair, fair.
• 49:55
  Speaker 2: It's Politico.
• 49:57
  Speaker 1: But much of the coverage had this like sort of
• 50:00
  Speaker 1: steel cage match-esque, like two men go into a meeting,
• 50:05
  Speaker 1: who comes out, who wins, who loses. It's just a diplomatic. meeting, right?
• 50:09
  Speaker 1: It's just two people meeting. This is not the first
• 50:12
  Speaker 1: summit between an American and a Russian president in decades
• 50:17
  Speaker 1: or anything like that. Obama met with Putin all the
• 50:19
  Speaker 1: time and Medvedev before that. And Trump obviously very famously
• 50:22
  Speaker 1: met with Putin in Helsinki. But it is newsworthy. Like
• 50:27
  Speaker 1: it is, it is like, it is fair. It is
• 50:29
  Speaker 1: fair to say it is the biggest story in Washington
• 50:34
  Speaker 1: politics for the week and maybe even the month. It
• 50:37
  Speaker 1: is like, Russia is an adversary. They obviously interfered in
• 50:42
  Speaker 1: our election. There's a lot going on there. They play
• 50:45
  Speaker 1: a big role in the world and one that is
• 50:46
  Speaker 1: often in conflict with us. Obviously, China is actually a
• 50:50
  Speaker 1: much bigger deal than Russia, but Russian summits get more
• 50:55
  Speaker 1: attention and Russian-U.S. relations get more attention because of the
• 50:57
  Speaker 1: long history of the Cold War and summits between Gorbachev
• 51:03
  Speaker 1: and Reagan and all of that pageantry that comes with it.
• 51:06
  Speaker 1: But It's fair to say that the coverage, while worthwhile,
• 51:10
  Speaker 1: was bordering on the absurd. I mean, partially, the Biden
• 51:14
  Speaker 1: folks also leaned into this. I think they had a purpose.
• 51:16
  Speaker 1: I don't think that's the wrong thing to do. They
• 51:17
  Speaker 1: could have done– what usually happens is they could have
• 51:20
  Speaker 1: just done a bilateral meeting at the G20 in some
• 51:23
  Speaker 1: conference room, right? But instead, they went to Geneva, the summit.
• 51:27
  Speaker 1: There was a lot of pageantry to it because I
• 51:30
  Speaker 1: think they wanted to make a point. not necessarily for
• 51:33
  Speaker 1: domestic politics, but both to Russia and the world that
• 51:35
  Speaker 1: this is a new era in U S Russian relationships,
• 51:38
  Speaker 1: both for good and bad. Like we are going to
• 51:40
  Speaker 1: be tougher than we were, but we're also going to
• 51:42
  Speaker 1: be less ridiculous. Um, so there was a, there was
• 51:45
  Speaker 1: a point to it.
• 51:47
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 51:47
  Speaker 2: It seems like they wanted to get the message out
• 51:49
  Speaker 2: that they want to be, that the U S wants
• 51:51
  Speaker 2: to be constructive on some issues, but also tough on
• 51:53
  Speaker 2: other issues like this, like the cyber attack issue where
• 51:56
  Speaker 2: Biden was, was a little tougher. Um, One thing that
• 51:59
  Speaker 2: the Biden folks probably weren't too happy about was the
• 52:01
  Speaker 2: president's first response to CNN Caitlin Collins's question about Putin
• 52:05
  Speaker 2: at the at Biden's press conference after the summit. Take
• 52:08
  Speaker 2: a listen.
• 52:09
  Speaker 1: Why are you so confident.
• 52:10
  Speaker 2: He'll change his behavior, Mr.
• 52:12
  Speaker 1: President? Yeah, I'm not confident he'll change his behavior. What
• 52:15
  Speaker 1: do you do all the time? When did I say
• 52:17
  Speaker 1: I was confident? I said, I said, what I said was,
• 52:21
  Speaker 1: let's get it straight.
• 52:23
  Speaker 2: I said what will change their behavior is that the
• 52:26
  Speaker 2: rest of the world reacts to.
• 52:27
  Speaker 1: Them and it diminishes their standing in the world. I'm
• 52:31
  Speaker 1: not confident of anything. I'm just stating the fact.
• 52:34
  Speaker 2: So before leaving Geneva on Air Force One, Biden then
• 52:37
  Speaker 2: walked over to a group of reporters on the tarmac
• 52:40
  Speaker 2: and said this.
• 52:41
  Speaker 1: I owe my last question an apology. I shouldn't have
• 52:45
  Speaker 1: been such a wise guy with the last answer I gave. Anyway,
• 52:49
  Speaker 1: thanks for being here.
• 52:50
  Speaker 2: So Biden gets a little feisty with a reporter, snaps, apologizes,
• 52:57
  Speaker 2: complains about the press. He said after that clip, why
• 52:59
  Speaker 2: do you guys always ask negative questions? You never ask
• 53:01
  Speaker 2: positive questions. To me, it seems like a small, fairly
• 53:06
  Speaker 2: standard bit of jousting between politicians and the people that
• 53:09
  Speaker 2: cover them. Dan, is that how it was? Is that
• 53:12
  Speaker 2: how it was treated on the Twitters?
• 53:15
  Speaker 1: No, it was not treated that way.
• 53:17
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 53:19
  Speaker 1: I'm taking a deep breath to try to handle this appropriately.
• 53:23
  Speaker 2: I take so many deep breaths on this one.
• 53:25
  Speaker 1: Last night was the night of deleted tweets. My drafts
• 53:30
  Speaker 1: folder was on fire about this. Ultimately, I'll say a
• 53:34
  Speaker 1: couple things. One, it is never a good idea for politicians, athletes,
• 53:39
  Speaker 1: public figures to be jerks to reporters. It's just not
• 53:43
  Speaker 1: the nice thing to do. More often than not, it
• 53:46
  Speaker 1: is women reporters who are on the receiving end of
• 53:50
  Speaker 1: those moments. You see it all the time in sports,
• 53:53
  Speaker 1: in politics. It's what happens. It is. It was good and, frankly,
• 53:58
  Speaker 1: unusual that Biden went out of his way, went over,
• 54:00
  Speaker 1: and apologized for doing it. Clearly, what happened is these
• 54:03
  Speaker 1: trips are exhausting for the president. This is the last
• 54:06
  Speaker 1: day of a very long foreign trip. They're jet lagged.
• 54:08
  Speaker 1: They haven't slept. They've been meeting 24-7. And he lost
• 54:11
  Speaker 1: his temper. And he apologized for it. That is a
• 54:13
  Speaker 1: human way to do it, a decent way to do it. But, but, but, but, but,
• 54:20
  Speaker 1: but we, and Caitlin Collins is a good reporter who
• 54:24
  Speaker 1: deserved better for sure. Like this is not, this is like,
• 54:27
  Speaker 1: if he was yelling at Peter Doocy, who was just
• 54:30
  Speaker 1: trying to be a troll, that's one thing. But Caitlin
• 54:33
  Speaker 1: Collins is a real reporter asking her, asking a totally
• 54:36
  Speaker 1: fair question. Although, you know, I, yeah, asking, asking a
• 54:40
  Speaker 1: question she's ever right to ask, but we need to
• 54:43
  Speaker 1: have a more nuanced conversation about media criticism. A politician
• 54:50
  Speaker 1: criticizing a reporter, even losing a temper with a reporter,
• 54:53
  Speaker 1: is not an assault on the free press. It's not
• 54:55
  Speaker 1: a message to authoritarians.
• 54:59
  Speaker 2: And that is not us as partisan Democrats. That is
• 55:01
  Speaker 2: true of Republicans doing that as well. If a Republican
• 55:05
  Speaker 2: president did what Biden did, not like, and everyone's like, oh, well,
• 55:10
  Speaker 2: Trump's at a low bar, so you shouldn't talk about Trump. No,
• 55:12
  Speaker 2: I get that. What I'm saying is that both Democratic
• 55:15
  Speaker 2: and Republican presidents should be able to criticize the media.
• 55:21
  Speaker 1: Just as you have a First Amendment right to report,
• 55:23
  Speaker 1: a politician or a reader or a podcast host or
• 55:26
  Speaker 1: anyone else has a First Amendment right to complain about
• 55:28
  Speaker 1: what you reported. That's how the fucking democracy works. And
• 55:32
  Speaker 1: the problem with it is like it is certainly fair
• 55:35
  Speaker 1: and appropriate for reporters to go on Twitter and defend
• 55:37
  Speaker 1: Caitlin Collins's journalistic credentials. Like that is what a good
• 55:41
  Speaker 1: colleague would do. I like to think we would do
• 55:43
  Speaker 1: that for each other and our friends if they were
• 55:45
  Speaker 1: in a similar situation. But all of the stuff about
• 55:49
  Speaker 1: how this was bad for democracy and this is an
• 55:51
  Speaker 1: assault on the free press is there's like a real
• 55:54
  Speaker 1: like boy who cried wolf problem with this. We can't
• 55:57
  Speaker 1: distinguish between media criticism and actual assaults on the media
• 56:02
  Speaker 1: or calling the media itself an enemy of the people
• 56:04
  Speaker 1: or directing violence at the media. And liberals on Twitter
• 56:08
  Speaker 1: were responsible for some of this conflation in the Trump
• 56:13
  Speaker 1: era where we would treat Trump calling the media the
• 56:16
  Speaker 1: enemy of the people or banning media outlets from covering
• 56:19
  Speaker 1: the White House or getting on Air Force One or
• 56:21
  Speaker 1: whatever else with Trump being mean to Jim Acosta or
• 56:25
  Speaker 1: whatever else. Those are not the same things and it's
• 56:27
  Speaker 1: important to separate them. There are very, very, very real threats,
• 56:32
  Speaker 1: particularly in the Trump era, to the role of the
• 56:35
  Speaker 1: free press in American democracy. You had Governor DeSantis, sign
• 56:40
  Speaker 1: a bill only in front of Fox News, in front
• 56:43
  Speaker 1: of a live broadcast of Fox and Friends. There's like
• 56:45
  Speaker 1: some real things happening here that changed the role the
• 56:47
  Speaker 1: press plays. But Joe Biden getting snippy with a reporter
• 56:50
  Speaker 1: is not one of those things. And then it was
• 56:54
  Speaker 1: the coverage that was interesting. It was like he got snippy.
• 56:56
  Speaker 1: He apologized. People are like, oh, that's great. He apologized.
• 56:59
  Speaker 1: That's the right thing to do. And then he complained
• 57:00
  Speaker 1: about his coverage after that. And then they got all
• 57:02
  Speaker 1: mad again.
• 57:03
  Speaker 2: Yeah. Look, so I saw like a bunch of people
• 57:06
  Speaker 2: on Twitter saying, oh, well, Caitlin Collins put words in
• 57:08
  Speaker 2: his mouth. She misquoted him by saying, why are you
• 57:11
  Speaker 2: so confident? He never said he was so confident. In
• 57:13
  Speaker 2: a way, that's right. Like, I didn't like Caitlin's question,
• 57:16
  Speaker 2: but she has every right to ask that question. And
• 57:19
  Speaker 2: also Joe Biden could have responded by simply saying, I
• 57:22
  Speaker 2: didn't say I was confident. And then his answer, like
• 57:25
  Speaker 2: very easily, he could have just said that. He could
• 57:27
  Speaker 2: have said, no, you're, you put words in my, or
• 57:29
  Speaker 2: you could have even said, That's putting words in my mouth.
• 57:31
  Speaker 2: I didn't say that. And then and then moving on.
• 57:32
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 57:33
  Speaker 2: Like he could have said that, too, but he didn't.
• 57:34
  Speaker 2: So it is how he snapped at her.
• 57:36
  Speaker 1: Right.
• 57:36
  Speaker 2: That's why he apologized. So there's that. But on the
• 57:39
  Speaker 2: other hand, like so many reporters, not Caitlin, but a
• 57:43
  Speaker 2: whole bunch of other reporters on Twitter, turn this into
• 57:44
  Speaker 2: some larger issue. Brian Seltzer in his media newsletter last night.
• 57:49
  Speaker 2: And by the way, it's a fantastic reliable sources is
• 57:51
  Speaker 2: a great nightly newsletter. I read it all the time.
• 57:53
  Speaker 2: And I think Brian's one of the best media reporters.
• 57:55
  Speaker 2: But he wrote, a media exec recently asked me if
• 57:58
  Speaker 2: I see a path toward persuading the Trump fan base
• 58:00
  Speaker 2: that brands like CNN actually supply real news. Is there
• 58:03
  Speaker 2: a way to show the people who swallowed Trump's anti-media
• 58:06
  Speaker 2: lies that we're not the monsters he claimed we are,
• 58:08
  Speaker 2: that we're flawed but not fake or enemies? If there
• 58:11
  Speaker 2: is such a path, it involves days like Wednesday, days
• 58:13
  Speaker 2: defined by strong questioning of people in power regardless of party.
• 58:18
  Speaker 2: I just, I don't think that's what that was. Like
• 58:22
  Speaker 2: the fact that they, it's very revealing that Brian wrote
• 58:25
  Speaker 2: that because I do think a lot of reporters believe
• 58:29
  Speaker 2: that if they show how tough they are on Democratic politicians,
• 58:34
  Speaker 2: that Republicans won't call them fake news and Republicans will
• 58:37
  Speaker 2: suddenly stop attacking them. But that's like, it's not, the
• 58:41
  Speaker 2: Republican attacks aren't on the level. They're not waiting for
• 58:44
  Speaker 2: you to be just as tough on Democrats as they
• 58:45
  Speaker 2: are on them. Like, they don't think that the free
• 58:47
  Speaker 2: press should exist, a lot of them, in the MAGA world, right? Like,
• 58:52
  Speaker 2: they're constantly attacking your very profession. They're calling you liars.
• 58:55
  Speaker 2: They're trying to discredit everything you do. They're not just
• 58:58
  Speaker 2: waiting for you to be tougher on Democrats so that
• 59:00
  Speaker 2: they can say, oh, okay, no, we're not gonna call
• 59:02
  Speaker 2: you fake news anymore. It's a game that they're playing.
• 59:05
  Speaker 2: And I'm not sure enough reporters quite understand that.
• 59:08
  Speaker 1: This is the... sad truth here that I agree with you.
• 59:12
  Speaker 1: Most people don't get. The Republicans waged a decades long
• 59:16
  Speaker 1: war against the media and they won. It is over.
• 59:20
  Speaker 1: The Republicans have won that war. They have convinced enough
• 59:23
  Speaker 1: Americans that the media cannot be trusted. What that means
• 59:26
  Speaker 1: is therefore the days in which Large portions of the
• 59:31
  Speaker 1: public all agree that the media is some independent arbiter,
• 59:35
  Speaker 1: fact checker, or referee of American politics, American democracy is over.
• 59:40
  Speaker 1: That doesn't mean that the media doesn't still play a
• 59:42
  Speaker 1: very important role. The investigative pieces they do are incredibly important.
• 59:47
  Speaker 1: And there are some media outlets that are succeeding despite
• 59:50
  Speaker 1: this as businesses and as journalistic endeavors, and they're doing
• 59:53
  Speaker 1: great work. But the old world in which they could
• 59:56
  Speaker 1: call balls and strikes on American politics is over. They lost.
• 1:00:00
  Speaker 1: And this is what happens when someone wages a war
• 1:00:02
  Speaker 1: on you. Instead of fighting it, you cover it.
• 1:00:05
  Speaker 2: And just to put a point on this, later in
• 1:00:11
  Speaker 2: Brian's newsletter, he notes that Laura Ingraham played a brief
• 1:00:14
  Speaker 2: portion of Biden's exchange with Collins, but called it, quote,
• 1:00:18
  Speaker 2: a total meltdown with his own comm shop, which is,
• 1:00:21
  Speaker 2: of course, incredibly insulting to CNN and Caitlin Collins. for
• 1:00:26
  Speaker 2: doing her job. And then half an hour later, she
• 1:00:28
  Speaker 2: ran a segment titled, Media Dutifully Defends Biden's Meagre Performance.
• 1:00:33
  Speaker 2: So it's like, even though the reporters were all saying, oh,
• 1:00:36
  Speaker 2: Caitlyn was so tough on him and it's important to
• 1:00:38
  Speaker 2: stand up and blah, blah, blah, and that will maybe change.
• 1:00:40
  Speaker 1: No, no, no.
• 1:00:41
  Speaker 2: This is what's going on on Fox while that's happening.
• 1:00:44
  Speaker 2: They're still shitting all over you and telling you and
• 1:00:47
  Speaker 2: calling you fake news and saying that you're Biden's comm shot.
• 1:00:49
  Speaker 2: So like, whatever you do, you should still, like, that
• 1:00:52
  Speaker 2: doesn't mean reporters shouldn't still ask tough questions of Democratic politicians.
• 1:00:56
  Speaker 2: and hold Democratic politicians accountable, of course they should. But
• 1:00:58
  Speaker 2: they shouldn't do it thinking that somehow that's going to
• 1:01:01
  Speaker 2: win over MAGA voters and thinking that they can trust
• 1:01:05
  Speaker 2: the press.
• 1:01:06
  Speaker 1: Yeah. I don't think Caitlin Collins or anyone else who
• 1:01:08
  Speaker 1: asked a tough question of Biden or Obama or Schumer
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 1: or Pelosi or anyone else necessarily doing it because they
• 1:01:13
  Speaker 1: think it's going to win them plaudits with Republicans. But
• 1:01:17
  Speaker 1: until you recognize the way the ground has shifted and
• 1:01:20
  Speaker 1: what is possible and impossible, you're not going to be
• 1:01:22
  Speaker 1: able to adjust the models for how you think about
• 1:01:25
  Speaker 1: your business for the current environment. CNN has viewers. They
• 1:01:30
  Speaker 1: service those viewers. Their job is to inform those viewers.
• 1:01:34
  Speaker 1: And I'm sure they all wake up every day and say,
• 1:01:37
  Speaker 1: our job is to hold politicians accountable. And there is
• 1:01:40
  Speaker 1: some very important journalistic work that does that. But you
• 1:01:43
  Speaker 1: are doing it for the purposes of your viewers. You
• 1:01:45
  Speaker 1: are no longer– Nothing you say about Donald Trump is
• 1:01:50
  Speaker 1: going to change the mind of a Trump voter because
• 1:01:51
  Speaker 1: Republicans spent 40 years telling everyone that you were biased
• 1:01:55
  Speaker 1: against Republicans. And you never pushed back on that. And
• 1:01:58
  Speaker 1: your response to that was to cater to them, to
• 1:02:02
  Speaker 1: offer to basically appeasement, right? The mainstream media's response to
• 1:02:10
  Speaker 1: Republican aggression was appeasement. And now the game is over.
• 1:02:13
  Speaker 1: And so the question is now what do you do?
• 1:02:14
  Speaker 1: What is the role you can play in American politics,
• 1:02:17
  Speaker 1: American society, American democracy that has value. There still is
• 1:02:20
  Speaker 1: a valuable one. It's incredible. We subscribe to a gazillion
• 1:02:23
  Speaker 1: various news outlets and newspapers and we find it very valuable,
• 1:02:26
  Speaker 1: but it's not the same role in which I think
• 1:02:27
  Speaker 1: a lot of journalists see themselves and a lot of
• 1:02:31
  Speaker 1: sort of American political thinkers think of the role journalism
• 1:02:36
  Speaker 1: plays in American politics.
• 1:02:39
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 1:02:39
  Speaker 2: It's not on the level.
• 1:02:41
  Speaker 3: Okay.
• 1:02:42
  Speaker 2: Okay. That is our show for today. Thank you so
• 1:02:44
  Speaker 2: much to Jelani Cobb for joining us. Everyone have a
• 1:02:47
  Speaker 2: great weekend and we'll see you next week.
• 1:02:49
  Speaker 1: Bye everyone.
• 1:02:55
  Speaker 2: Pod Save America is a Crooked Media production. The executive
• 1:02:58
  Speaker 2: producer is Michael Martinez. Our senior producer is Flavia Casas.
• 1:03:02
  Speaker 2: Our associate producers are Jazzy Marine and Olivia Martinez. It's
• 1:03:06
  Speaker 2: mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Kyle Seglin is our
• 1:03:09
  Speaker 2: sound engineer. Thanks to Tanya Somenator, Katie Long, Roman Papadimitriou,
• 1:03:13
  Speaker 2: Caroline Rustin, and Justine Howe for production support. And to
• 1:03:16
  Speaker 2: our digital team, Elijah Cohn, Nar Melkonian, Yale Freed, and
• 1:03:20
  Speaker 2: Milo Kim, who film and upload these episodes as videos
• 1:03:23
  Speaker 2: every week.