Latest / Pod Save America / “America’s grief vs. Trump’s grievances.”

Transcript

“America’s grief vs. Trump’s grievances.” · Pod Save America

0:20
Speaker 1: Welcome to Pod Save America. I'm Jon Favreau.
0:22
Speaker 2: I'm Dan Pfeiffer.
0:23
Speaker 1: Later in the pod, Dan's conversation with the New Yorker's
0:25
Speaker 1: Jane Mayer about America's cancer, Fox News. But first, we're
0:30
Speaker 1: going to talk about the president's big day of national healing,
0:33
Speaker 1: the politics of gun reform, and what a recent wave
0:36
Speaker 1: of house retirements tells us about 2020.
0:40
Speaker 3: A few quick housekeeping notes.
0:41
Speaker 1: On a packed episode of Pod Save the World this week,
0:43
Speaker 1: Tommy and Ben talked about right-wing domestic terrorists with former
0:47
Speaker 1: counterterrorism director Nick Rasmussen. They also covered the protests in
0:50
Speaker 1: Hong Kong, what's happening with India and Kashmir, and why
0:53
Speaker 1: Lindsay Lohan is hanging out with the Saudi crown prince.
0:58
Speaker 1: Lindsay Lohan and the Crown Prince.
1:00
Speaker 3: Very cool. Very cool.
1:01
Speaker 2: Seems sketchy.
1:02
Speaker 3: Also, I missed that headline.
1:06
Speaker 1: Also a reminder that our Los Angeles Pod Save America
1:08
Speaker 1: live show is taking place at the Greek on August 17th.
1:11
Speaker 3: Wow, that's next Saturday.
1:13
Speaker 1: With performances from Maggie Rogers, Amanda Seale's best host, and
1:16
Speaker 1: Jim James. Our co-host will be Jamel Hill. Proceeds from
1:19
Speaker 1: the show will be donated to organizations at the forefront
1:21
Speaker 1: of the fight to protect the vote across America. So
1:24
Speaker 1: grab your tickets at crooked.com slash live.
1:28
Speaker 3: The Greek.
1:30
Speaker 1: All right, let's get to the news. Just a few
1:33
Speaker 1: days after a mass shooting and the worst terrorist attack
1:36
Speaker 1: against the Latino community in modern American history, Donald Trump
1:40
Speaker 1: spent Wednesday lashing out at the following people between visits
1:43
Speaker 1: with the victims and their families in Dayton, Ohio and
1:45
Speaker 1: El Paso, Texas. Beto O'Rourke, Joe Biden, Sherrod Brown, Dayton
1:49
Speaker 1: Mayor Nan Whaley, Elizabeth Warren, Bernie Sanders, Joaquin Castro, Julian Castro,
1:54
Speaker 1: the Democrats, Fox News' Shep Smith, CNN, and the New
1:57
Speaker 1: York Times. which briefly ran a headline on Monday that said,
2:01
Speaker 1: Trump urges unity versus racism. A Times story also reported
2:05
Speaker 1: that when Trump's campaign was asked whether he'd stop referring
2:08
Speaker 1: to Hispanic immigration as an invasion, a description used by
2:12
Speaker 1: the white nationalist terrorists who murdered 22 people in El Paso,
2:15
Speaker 1: a senior advisor for the Trump campaign had a one-word answer. No.
2:21
Speaker 3: So, Dan, it is by now... Completely.
2:24
Speaker 1: Unsurprising that Donald Trump acts like a narcissistic sociopath during
2:28
Speaker 1: times of national tragedy. And yet, somehow it's still always
2:33
Speaker 1: worse than you imagine it will be, at least for me.
2:36
Speaker 1: What was your reaction watching all of this unfold yesterday?
2:39
Speaker 2: I mean, it was really that. It's like, I know
2:42
Speaker 2: we are not supposed to be surprised or shocked by
2:44
Speaker 2: anything Trump does, that he is the worst person in America,
2:47
Speaker 2: and we all know this. But even still, this week...
2:53
Speaker 2: was disgusting. Just absolutely disgusting that he could go to
3:01
Speaker 2: those communities, walk through those hospitals, meet with the people
3:05
Speaker 2: who were shot and injured and the family members of
3:07
Speaker 2: the people who were killed, walk out of there and
3:11
Speaker 2: the entire time think that the true victim of the
3:14
Speaker 2: day was Donald Trump. That he just is so, he
3:19
Speaker 2: has just no capacity for compassion or empathy or even
3:23
Speaker 2: have an emotional connection with another human. There was this
3:25
Speaker 2: video that came out today of his discussion in El
3:28
Speaker 2: Paso where he applauds the medical staff, which is very
3:30
Speaker 2: nice and he should do, and immediately pivots to how
3:33
Speaker 2: big his rally crowd was and attacking better works rally
3:36
Speaker 2: crowd from their trip to El Paso a few months ago.
3:38
Speaker 2: It is just, it is just mind boggling what a
3:41
Speaker 2: horrible human being he is. I mean, it's just, it
3:44
Speaker 2: really is. And I hope it never ceases to shock
3:48
Speaker 2: us when we see it.
3:51
Speaker 1: Yeah. Like I, I don't just hope to never have
3:53
Speaker 1: a president or any kind of leader in this country
3:56
Speaker 1: like this. I hope to never know a human being
3:59
Speaker 1: like this. I mean, it's just, it is on the
4:02
Speaker 1: most human level. It is revolting to watch that. Like,
4:06
Speaker 1: I don't know.
4:07
Speaker 2: You're right.
4:07
Speaker 1: Like, I don't know how any human being seeing that
4:11
Speaker 1: kind of tragedy, seeing that kind of grief up close
4:15
Speaker 1: in person in two different cities could be make the
4:19
Speaker 1: entire day about themselves. I mean, it was about, it
4:21
Speaker 1: was grievance, you know, all the, the, the country is grieving.
4:25
Speaker 1: And for Trump, it was all about grievance. That was the,
4:27
Speaker 1: it was the whole thing, everything. He was a victim.
4:30
Speaker 1: He wasn't getting enough praise. The white house releases this
4:34
Speaker 1: fucking video of him in the hospitals. And the music
4:39
Speaker 1: looked like, I don't know. It's, it sounded like the
4:41
Speaker 1: fucking intro to, uh, like a, uh, an NFL game.
4:46
Speaker 1: It was the, the music was insane. And all of
4:49
Speaker 1: the images are people taking pictures of Donald Trump and
4:52
Speaker 1: shaking his hand. There are no pictures of anything. It wasn't,
4:55
Speaker 1: it wasn't like people get hugging each other and all
4:58
Speaker 1: the kinds of things you'd, you'd imagine to see in
5:00
Speaker 1: a video like that. It was all just people taking
5:02
Speaker 1: pictures of Trump and smiling at him and shaking his hand.
5:05
Speaker 3: That was the video.
5:06
Speaker 2: I mean, like there are legitimate questions about the etiquette, uh,
5:10
Speaker 2: inappropriateness of doing a video about a thing like this,
5:12
Speaker 2: but there is a video that is about the law
5:15
Speaker 2: enforcement officers who save people's lives and they, And the
5:17
Speaker 2: other heroes who were in the Walmart in El Paso
5:21
Speaker 2: or in Dayton who saved people's lives or a story
5:25
Speaker 2: of a community coming together to heal and recover from
5:29
Speaker 2: something like this. Instead, it is just a video about
5:33
Speaker 2: how popular Trump is, which also makes it fake news
5:36
Speaker 2: because he's not very popular. I mean, it's just, but
5:39
Speaker 2: it's like, this is not just Trump. There are people
5:42
Speaker 2: that we pay. The American taxpayer paid for that fucking video.
5:44
Speaker 2: There are people in the White House who decided that
5:47
Speaker 2: was right then and there. Like, so it's not just
5:49
Speaker 2: that we have this irrational narcissist with a Twitter account. It's,
5:52
Speaker 2: this is the function of the White House is to
5:54
Speaker 2: serve this, like, massively insecure, empty shell of a human being.
6:02
Speaker 1: Yeah, and like, I mean, it's not just Trump in that,
6:05
Speaker 1: you know, Dan Scavino, fucking, you know, his social media
6:09
Speaker 1: director that is responsible for half these tweets, was tweeting yesterday,
6:13
Speaker 1: he was treated like a rock star in the hospital.
6:16
Speaker 1: He's visiting people who are, you know, were wounded in
6:20
Speaker 1: a mass shooting or victims of a terrorist attack. And
6:23
Speaker 1: the White House and Kellyanne Conway was basically saying the
6:26
Speaker 1: same thing, too. He's treated like a rock star. People
6:28
Speaker 1: loved him. And then this unbelievably just awful thing happens
6:33
Speaker 1: where In Dayton, he's with the mayor of Dayton. He's
6:36
Speaker 1: with Sherrod Brown. They tour the hospital. Sherrod Brown and
6:41
Speaker 1: Mayor Whaley come out, and they hold a press conference.
6:46
Speaker 1: Sherrod actually says, you know, Trump, he did the right thing.
6:49
Speaker 1: He comforted people. Melania comforted people. They both did the
6:51
Speaker 1: right thing.
6:52
Speaker 3: It was good.
6:53
Speaker 1: And then said, you know, I did push him on
6:55
Speaker 1: gun control and said that, you know, we should take
6:58
Speaker 1: these weapons out of people's hands. And Trump, I guess,
7:00
Speaker 1: sees that part on CNN. And then just goes crazy
7:04
Speaker 1: on Twitter and on television saying that, and so does
7:06
Speaker 1: his staff, by the way, saying Sherrod Brown's a liar,
7:09
Speaker 1: failed presidential candidate, blah, blah, blah. And just completely lies
7:13
Speaker 1: about the fact that Sherrod Brown actually said he did
7:17
Speaker 1: a good job in the hospital.
7:19
Speaker 3: I don't know, man.
7:20
Speaker 2: It's bad. It's really bad. It's really, really bad. And
7:26
Speaker 2: it gets worse. Like he is, he is angry. actively
7:30
Speaker 2: becoming a worse president every single day, which is the
7:32
Speaker 2: opposite of the way they should go.
7:35
Speaker 3: Yeah.
7:36
Speaker 1: And look, and this whole thing was not only predictable,
7:39
Speaker 1: but predicted by many people from across the political spectrum.
7:44
Speaker 1: George Conway, conservative Republican lawyer, George Conway, husband of Kellyanne Conway.
7:50
Speaker 1: A couple of days before Trump did these visits, had
7:53
Speaker 1: this Twitter thread where he's like, you know how this
7:56
Speaker 1: is going to go. Donald Trump's going to give a
7:58
Speaker 1: speech on Monday, that's some sober speech on a teleprompter,
8:03
Speaker 1: and everyone's going to, you know, pat him on the
8:05
Speaker 1: back for it. But he's not going to get enough
8:07
Speaker 1: love for the speech because he won't make any policy changes.
8:10
Speaker 1: He won't talk about gun control. He's still a racist.
8:13
Speaker 1: So because then the coverage won't reflect that everyone loves him,
8:17
Speaker 1: he will get pissed at the coverage, and then he
8:19
Speaker 1: will start lashing out at everyone within a couple days.
8:22
Speaker 1: And sure enough, that's exactly what happened. And it's not
8:25
Speaker 1: like George Conway is some fucking genius. anyone could have
8:28
Speaker 1: seen this coming because this is who the man is
8:31
Speaker 1: and he will never change.
8:33
Speaker 2: It's so fucking gross.
8:34
Speaker 1: Uh, so most of Trump's anger yesterday was, you know,
8:38
Speaker 1: per usual about Trump not getting enough praise, but I
8:40
Speaker 1: do want to talk about how one of Trump's tweets
8:42
Speaker 1: yesterday quoted reports that the Dayton shooter had a history
8:45
Speaker 1: of supporting political figures like Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Antifa. Um, which,
8:51
Speaker 1: you know, even that report from a right wing outlet is, uh,
8:54
Speaker 1: fairly exaggerated, you know? Um, Trump later repeated this to
8:58
Speaker 1: reporters and then answered a question about whether the growing
9:01
Speaker 1: threat of white nationalism concerns him like this, quote, I
9:05
Speaker 1: am concerned about the rise of any group of hate,
9:08
Speaker 1: whether it's white supremacy, whether it's any other kind of supremacy,
9:12
Speaker 1: whether it's Antifa, whether it's any group of hate, I
9:14
Speaker 1: am concerned about it.
9:16
Speaker 3: Dan, what does that remind you of?
9:18
Speaker 2: John, there are very fine people on both sides.
9:21
Speaker 1: I mean, so, and, you know, the broader question here,
9:25
Speaker 1: what is... Trump and the White House and Republican pundits
9:29
Speaker 1: and the conservative media all trying to accomplish by talking
9:32
Speaker 1: about who the Dayton shooter may have voted for.
9:36
Speaker 2: Muddy the waters. This is the most classic Trump political technique.
9:41
Speaker 2: Trump knows he's incapable of convincing people that he is
9:44
Speaker 2: not shitty, but he also knows he's very capable of
9:47
Speaker 2: convincing people that everyone else is also shitty. And so
9:50
Speaker 2: this is exactly what 2016 was about. Yeah, I'm corrupt,
9:54
Speaker 2: but check out the Clinton Foundation. yeah, I'm a liar,
9:57
Speaker 2: but check out this thing Hillary Clinton claimed and just
10:00
Speaker 2: over and over again, and you just make everyone feel
10:03
Speaker 2: so cynical and terrible that they tune out and stop caring.
10:06
Speaker 2: And that's exactly what we're doing here. And it's based
10:09
Speaker 2: on his really intuitive understanding of how the media works.
10:15
Speaker 2: which is he knows that their default position is both sides.
10:18
Speaker 2: So if he can give an argument for the other side,
10:22
Speaker 2: that it will be reported either as fact or as
10:26
Speaker 2: Trump said X. So it becomes Trump said, she said,
10:29
Speaker 2: or Trump said, he said, or whatever else. And he's
10:34
Speaker 2: trying to draw a false equivalency here because these are
10:37
Speaker 2: fundamentally different things. What the El Paso shooter did. And
10:43
Speaker 2: we know what the El Paso shooter was thinking because
10:45
Speaker 2: the El Paso shooter posted a manifesto that echoes the
10:48
Speaker 2: message of the Trump campaign, that echoes the message of
10:51
Speaker 2: Fox News. And who knows about these reports, but the
10:58
Speaker 2: Dayton shooter was not inspired by the rhetoric of Elizabeth Warren.
11:02
Speaker 2: Let me check my notes on what Elizabeth Warren's rhetoric is. Oh, yes, serious, wonky,
11:07
Speaker 2: policy-based conversation about fixing the American economy. which does not
11:10
Speaker 2: seem to be at the heart of what led to
11:15
Speaker 2: the tragedy in Dayton.
11:17
Speaker 1: Yeah, also there's plenty of evidence so far that the
11:19
Speaker 1: Dayton shooter was a misogynist. He had a kill list
11:23
Speaker 1: and a rape list in high school. I mean, he
11:25
Speaker 1: was like a very troubled young man. And that's what
11:30
Speaker 1: the evidence is. There's so far, and this may change,
11:33
Speaker 1: but there's so far zero evidence that he was.
11:36
Speaker 3: Radicalized by a political ideology at all. But, you know,
11:40
Speaker 3: you're right.
11:40
Speaker 1: I mean, I think the most important point here is
11:42
Speaker 1: that there is a larger media narrative about polarization in
11:46
Speaker 1: America and how both sides are extremely polarized that does
11:50
Speaker 1: not recognize that there's asymmetric polarization in this country, that
11:54
Speaker 1: Republicans are far more extreme and polarized than Democrats are.
11:58
Speaker 1: And the Republican Party as a whole is far more
12:00
Speaker 1: extreme and polarized than the Democratic Party is or the left.
12:05
Speaker 1: And so but because there's this narrative that exists in
12:07
Speaker 1: the media, it is easy for Trump and Republican pundits
12:11
Speaker 1: and people on Fox to feed. I mean, if you
12:13
Speaker 1: watch Fox over the last couple of days, you know,
12:16
Speaker 1: what are they talking about? They'll talk about Antifa. They'll
12:18
Speaker 1: talk about this Dayton shooter thing. They'll talk about protesters
12:21
Speaker 1: outside of Mitch McConnell's house. They'll basically Fox over the
12:25
Speaker 1: last couple of days has been about how Fox and
12:28
Speaker 1: conservatives and Donald Trump are victims.
12:31
Speaker 4: Right.
12:31
Speaker 1: They are the real victims here because for some weird reason,
12:35
Speaker 1: they're all being accused of racism. They're all being accused
12:38
Speaker 1: of causing this. Gee, I wonder why. Look at the
12:41
Speaker 1: fucking manifesto that the El Paso terrorist wrote. It is
12:46
Speaker 1: language directly pulled from Donald Trump, from Tucker Carlson, from
12:49
Speaker 1: Laura Ingraham, from Fox News, directly. Something that flew under
12:54
Speaker 1: the radar this week, Cesar Sayoc, the pipe bomber, from
12:59
Speaker 1: October of 2018, who tried to assassinate Barack Obama, Hillary,
13:03
Speaker 1: and Bill Clinton, other Democratic leaders, by attempting to mail
13:07
Speaker 1: them pipe bombs, was sentenced. And his defense, his defense
13:12
Speaker 1: in his case, was that Donald Trump inspired him to
13:15
Speaker 1: do this.
13:17
Speaker 3: What are we doing here? There is no fucking equivalence.
13:21
Speaker 2: Donald Trump has an enemies list. He is public about it.
13:24
Speaker 2: He talks about it all the time. This is the...
13:27
Speaker 2: second time in recent memory where someone has taken it
13:31
Speaker 2: upon themselves to act on that enemies list. And it is,
13:38
Speaker 2: and I just want to address the Fox News part
13:40
Speaker 2: of this, and I talked about this with Jane in
13:41
Speaker 2: our conversation, it'll be at the end of this pod,
13:43
Speaker 2: but white nationalism is the message of Fox News. It's
13:46
Speaker 2: not just the message of Tucker Carlson and Laura Ingraham.
13:49
Speaker 2: It is the message of Fox and Friends. It's the
13:51
Speaker 2: message of The Five and all the other shitty shows
13:53
Speaker 2: on that shitty network. The entire point, and this has
13:55
Speaker 2: been the point since Barack Obama wrote ran for president
13:58
Speaker 2: in 2008, is that white people are under assault from
14:03
Speaker 2: non-white people. That is immigrants taking your jobs. That is
14:06
Speaker 2: African-Americans living in cities who are taking your taxpayer dollars.
14:10
Speaker 2: It is Muslims who are coming here to kill you.
14:13
Speaker 2: It is MS-13 coming here to kill you. It's armies
14:15
Speaker 2: of migrants invading America. That is their message. They've created
14:19
Speaker 2: a climate of hate in this country that is amplified
14:21
Speaker 2: by Trump news, and it is a toxic stew. And
14:24
Speaker 2: there has been zero fucking introspection from anyone on the right,
14:28
Speaker 2: other than a random state senator in Nebraska, who was
14:33
Speaker 2: asked to leave the party for that reason, about how
14:36
Speaker 2: their rhetoric has contributed to a climate of hate in
14:38
Speaker 2: a country where you can buy a fucking assault weapon
14:41
Speaker 2: in a store. And that, like, you would just hope
14:45
Speaker 2: that someone would look at what they are saying, look
14:48
Speaker 2: at what they are doing, and wondering if they should stop.
14:51
Speaker 2: But they aren't. They are incapable of that. It is
14:54
Speaker 2: deeply dangerous and deeply disturbing. And it is a problem
14:56
Speaker 2: that will persist long after we get Trump out of
14:59
Speaker 2: the White House.
15:01
Speaker 3: Right.
15:01
Speaker 1: Well, I mean, look, if you want to completely just
15:04
Speaker 1: take the politics out of this, the FBI, Chris Wray,
15:09
Speaker 1: the FBI director, says that domestic terrorism is our number
15:12
Speaker 1: one threat right now and that most of the cases
15:16
Speaker 1: of domestic terrorism over the last couple of years have been,
15:20
Speaker 1: you know, have involved white supremacists.
15:23
Speaker 3: CNN, reported last night.
15:26
Speaker 1: That the White House rejected efforts by the Department of
15:28
Speaker 1: Homeland Security to make combating domestic terrorism like the threat
15:31
Speaker 1: from white supremacists a greater priority. Instead, the White House
15:35
Speaker 1: proposed that their national counterterrorism strategy focus on radical Islamists
15:41
Speaker 1: and foreign drug dealers because that would please the president.
15:44
Speaker 1: That's what they said back to the Department of Homeland
15:46
Speaker 1: Security and the career officials at the Department of Homeland Security.
15:49
Speaker 1: And by the way, some of the political appointees, Trump
15:51
Speaker 1: political appointees, that we had The national security and law
15:55
Speaker 1: enforcement apparatus of this country saying that this is a
15:58
Speaker 1: threat to the security of this country, domestic terrorists, white supremacists,
16:02
Speaker 1: is a growing threat in this country.
16:04
Speaker 3: And the Trump White House said no. Trump likes to
16:07
Speaker 3: have Frederick be about.
16:07
Speaker 2: And why do they say no, John?
16:09
Speaker 3: Because Donald Trump is a racist.
16:11
Speaker 2: And it would upset Trump to read that. He would
16:14
Speaker 2: think you were targeting him in this case. Right, because
16:16
Speaker 2: he's a racist. And this is... We talked about this
16:18
Speaker 2: a few months ago, but it's the same thing when
16:21
Speaker 2: the Department of Homeland Security was trying to have a
16:24
Speaker 2: high-level White House meeting about stopping Russian interference in the election.
16:28
Speaker 2: And the White House said no because it would upset Trump.
16:30
Speaker 2: So the national security strategy in this country to protect
16:33
Speaker 2: Americans from domestic terrorism and foreign interference in our elections
16:36
Speaker 2: is being hampered out of fear of a temper tantrum
16:39
Speaker 2: from the commander-in-chief. We treat my one-year-old daughter more like
16:44
Speaker 2: an adult than the U.S. government treats the President of
16:46
Speaker 2: the United States. Her responsibilities are less, so the consequences
16:49
Speaker 2: are smaller.
16:51
Speaker 3: Yeah.
16:52
Speaker 1: And I mean, I just think it's an important point because,
16:54
Speaker 1: you know, we focus so much day to day on
16:56
Speaker 1: Trump's rhetoric and the tweets and we can label them
16:59
Speaker 1: racist or not racist or narcissistic or not or whatever.
17:03
Speaker 1: But it's not just his words that are a problem here,
17:07
Speaker 1: though they are. It is the policies that flow from
17:11
Speaker 1: both his words and his deeply broken personality because he
17:16
Speaker 1: is at the top of the federal government. And so
17:18
Speaker 1: there are policy consequences from this that are happening every
17:21
Speaker 1: single day that often fly under the radar because we're
17:25
Speaker 1: just focused on how crazy he is from day to day.
17:28
Speaker 3: And it's really dangerous.
17:30
Speaker 2: I think people like to comfort themselves with this idea
17:33
Speaker 2: that there are a bunch of Jim Mattis types in
17:35
Speaker 2: the government who just ignore Trump's tweets and do the
17:37
Speaker 2: right thing anyway. And that's not right. When the president
17:41
Speaker 2: says something where he says it in an executive order
17:43
Speaker 2: or a tweet, that becomes policy in the United States.
17:45
Speaker 2: And so These Twitter rants from the president are driving
17:49
Speaker 2: the policy in the United States and with great consequences
17:52
Speaker 2: for people's lives and safety.
17:54
Speaker 3: Yeah.
17:55
Speaker 1: And so obviously I would say that the policy consequences
17:57
Speaker 1: are the most important thing to focus on here. But,
18:00
Speaker 1: you know, just going back to yesterday, you know, I
18:03
Speaker 1: wasn't just angry watching this. Like I was pretty sad. And,
18:07
Speaker 1: you know, because like I think in times of national tragedy,
18:11
Speaker 1: you just you want a president to act like a president,
18:14
Speaker 1: even if you didn't vote for that president. And, you know,
18:17
Speaker 1: you and I watched Obama do this way too many
18:19
Speaker 1: times in the White House. But I also think, you know,
18:22
Speaker 1: that's maybe one part of the job, maybe the only
18:25
Speaker 1: part of the job that even a president like George W.
18:28
Speaker 1: Bush did pretty well after a national tragedy. Do you
18:32
Speaker 1: think this ability for a president to console and empathize
18:36
Speaker 1: is important? Or is this just more optics bullshit that
18:40
Speaker 1: we're comforting ourselves or not comforting ourselves with?
18:43
Speaker 3: I think it is important.
18:44
Speaker 2: I think... there are times, or there were times, I
18:48
Speaker 2: would say, when people would put politics aside, where you
18:52
Speaker 2: really would, you want the president to have what our
18:57
Speaker 2: friend David Axelrod would call the pastoral role of the presidency,
19:00
Speaker 2: to empathize with what has happened and let you know
19:05
Speaker 2: when your community is hurting, whether it's from a shooting
19:07
Speaker 2: or a hurricane or some other disaster, that the president
19:11
Speaker 2: And your government has your back and that the president
19:14
Speaker 2: would take the time out of their busy day to
19:16
Speaker 2: go to your community and grieve with you and console
19:20
Speaker 2: you and support you. And, you know, we went with
19:23
Speaker 2: President Obama to, you know, particularly after natural disasters and
19:26
Speaker 2: tornadoes and things like that, to some of the reddest
19:28
Speaker 2: parts of the country. And there are people, most of
19:30
Speaker 2: the people he saw did not vote for him in 2008,
19:33
Speaker 2: did not vote for him in 2012, would never vote
19:34
Speaker 2: for him. But they were appreciative that he was there.
19:38
Speaker 2: His presence meant something. And I really worry that Trump,
19:43
Speaker 2: in the many ways in which he has ripped at
19:46
Speaker 2: the moral fabric of this country, has made it so
19:48
Speaker 2: that that will never be the same again. That because
19:53
Speaker 2: he is so toxic and so terrible, the other side
19:55
Speaker 2: will feel obligated to respond to a normal president who's
19:59
Speaker 2: a Democrat in the abnormal ways in which we've been
20:01
Speaker 2: forced to respond to Trump. And I think it is
20:06
Speaker 2: sad that it will never be... the same. And I,
20:10
Speaker 2: I would say you are correct that George Bush did
20:13
Speaker 2: that well, but he also contributed to this problem by
20:16
Speaker 2: taking the moment of national unity after, after 9-11 and
20:22
Speaker 2: then using it to, to jam the country into a
20:27
Speaker 2: war of choice in the country that did not invade us.
20:29
Speaker 2: And that started us down this path and Trump is
20:31
Speaker 2: finishing the job.
20:33
Speaker 1: Yeah, no, he, uh, it is not to say that
20:37
Speaker 1: George W. Bush wasn't, uh, in the running for the
20:39
Speaker 1: worst president we've ever had.
20:41
Speaker 2: I'm not trying to make you a Bush supporter, but
20:44
Speaker 2: you were right.
20:46
Speaker 1: I realize what's coming after I said that, believe me.
20:49
Speaker 1: But look, no, I think George W. Bush going to
20:51
Speaker 1: a mosque after 9-11, there are these moments where you're like,
20:56
Speaker 1: this fucking guy, and this was of course before Iraq,
20:58
Speaker 1: once Iraq happens, you're like, no, fuck him, he's done.
21:02
Speaker 1: But there are moments before Iraq where you're like, I
21:04
Speaker 1: did not vote for this guy, I don't like this guy,
21:06
Speaker 1: I hate most of the things he stands for, but
21:08
Speaker 1: Good for him, at least in this moment, not making
21:10
Speaker 1: it worse and not making it divisive. And I think
21:14
Speaker 1: you're right that what's happening, what happened this week, what
21:17
Speaker 1: happens every time there's a national tragedy now, I think
21:21
Speaker 1: the way that Trump has acted and, you know, not
21:24
Speaker 1: just Trump, but Fox News, because they speak for the
21:27
Speaker 1: or they influence the Trump's base, will reverberate for a
21:31
Speaker 1: long time now. And I think the future presidents, Democratic
21:35
Speaker 1: presidents especially, are going to have to sort of go
21:39
Speaker 1: out of the way to be, to, you know, try
21:42
Speaker 1: to find that decency and compassion during times of tragedy.
21:47
Speaker 1: And look, and I remember, you know, working with Obama
21:50
Speaker 1: on some of these speeches after a tragedy or a shooting. And,
21:55
Speaker 1: you know, there were times, especially towards the end when
21:58
Speaker 1: he would, you know, push for gun control and, you know,
22:02
Speaker 1: Republicans would criticize him for fucking politicizing the moment. But
22:06
Speaker 1: I remember we took extra care that even when we
22:10
Speaker 1: were pushing for gun control, you'd never think of attacking
22:16
Speaker 1: the Republican Party, attacking Republican politicians by name, lashing out
22:21
Speaker 1: at people, calling them fucking failed presidential candidates and all
22:24
Speaker 1: the other bullshit, as he was meeting with grieving families
22:28
Speaker 1: or speaking at memorial services. I mean, that's insane to
22:31
Speaker 1: even think about. And the reason is, you know, and
22:35
Speaker 1: there were times after some of those massacres where we
22:38
Speaker 1: were all very, very pissed at the Republican Party. And
22:41
Speaker 1: we said, this is ridiculous that gun control has been
22:43
Speaker 1: held up, even though it's a 90% issue for background
22:46
Speaker 1: checks or whatever. But we all controlled ourselves. The president
22:51
Speaker 1: controlled himself because this is a moment that calls for
22:55
Speaker 1: a politician to.
22:56
Speaker 3: Sort of rise above.
22:57
Speaker 1: Yes, fight hard for the policy, push hard for the policy,
23:00
Speaker 1: point out who's blocking it, but just yelling about politicians,
23:04
Speaker 1: attacking them personally.
23:05
Speaker 3: What the fuck?
23:06
Speaker 2: But at least if you're going to yell, yell about
23:08
Speaker 2: a policy issue. Be mad that they're opposing gun control.
23:11
Speaker 2: Don't be mad because they said something that you thought
23:13
Speaker 2: was mean. Right? And this isn't, it's not even just, like,
23:18
Speaker 2: it's just, I want to just, you've made this point,
23:20
Speaker 2: we've made it a thousand times, it should be made
23:22
Speaker 2: over and over again. This is not unacceptable conduct for
23:25
Speaker 2: a president. This is unacceptable conduct for a human being.
23:30
Speaker 2: If you saw your dentist act like this, you would
23:32
Speaker 2: not let him put his hands in your mouth. And
23:35
Speaker 2: so the idea, like, it's just so, it is so
23:39
Speaker 2: fucking gross and so infuriating and so sad. It is
23:43
Speaker 2: fucking sad that this is what we are living in.
23:46
Speaker 1: We should spend a few minutes on how the media
23:48
Speaker 1: has handled their coverage of Trump since the attacks. You know,
23:52
Speaker 1: there was a 48-hour Twitter debate about whether people should
23:54
Speaker 1: cancel their New York Times subscriptions over that shockingly terrible headline,
23:59
Speaker 1: Trump urges unity versus racism. But it wasn't just that
24:02
Speaker 1: Times headline that pissed people off. You know, Politico had
24:05
Speaker 1: a story this week that you were quoted in about
24:06
Speaker 1: how liberal frustration with the way the media covers Trump
24:09
Speaker 1: has boiled over. A sentiment that was expressed most eloquently
24:14
Speaker 1: by Beto O'Rourke when he said, members of the press,
24:16
Speaker 1: what the fuck? Dan, what did you think of the
24:20
Speaker 1: Times headline fiasco? And why do you think in general
24:25
Speaker 1: the media keeps doing this shit?
24:27
Speaker 2: I mean, I was very mad about the Times headline,
24:29
Speaker 2: as everyone else was. But the anger ultimately was not
24:34
Speaker 2: really about the headline of the first edition. It was
24:36
Speaker 2: the boiling over of a larger frustration with the media
24:41
Speaker 2: writ large and the Times more specifically. And some of
24:46
Speaker 2: that frustration is unfair and puts on the Times unfair
24:51
Speaker 2: expectations of how accountability should be delivered to Trump in
24:56
Speaker 2: this era. Some of it is very fair. And I read, basically,
25:01
Speaker 2: The Times did something that's very unusual for The Times,
25:03
Speaker 2: which is they were transparent about their decision-making process this time.
25:06
Speaker 2: And Dean McKay, the editor of The Times, who was
25:08
Speaker 2: a very smart and accomplished guy, did a number of interviews.
25:12
Speaker 2: And he did one with The Atlantic's Lizzie O'Leary that
25:14
Speaker 2: I thought was really fascinating. And he walked through how
25:17
Speaker 2: they ended up with that headline. And it sounds pretty
25:20
Speaker 2: clearly that it was human error. It was people making
25:24
Speaker 2: a decision with too fast without enough supervision and they
25:29
Speaker 2: made a mistake and they fixed it. And I think
25:31
Speaker 2: that is, I don't think there was some meeting where
25:33
Speaker 2: the time decided how to kiss up to Trump and
25:35
Speaker 2: this is what they came up with. And you and
25:37
Speaker 2: I know from working in government that when you were
25:41
Speaker 2: debating between the reasons for a problem being either incompetence
25:45
Speaker 2: or conspiracy, it's almost always incompetence. And I think that's
25:48
Speaker 2: what happened here. But there was something in that interview
25:51
Speaker 2: that was really interesting, and I think spoke to what
25:55
Speaker 2: Beto talked about, which is Dean went well out of
26:02
Speaker 2: his way in there to say that this is not
26:06
Speaker 2: an extraordinary time, that we in America have been here before.
26:09
Speaker 2: We have had leaders like Trump before. We've had tough
26:11
Speaker 2: times before. And that quote explains everything about the Times
26:19
Speaker 2: editorial decision-making process of the last several years. Which is
26:24
Speaker 2: not to say they haven't done great journalism. They have
26:25
Speaker 2: great journalists. They are the gold standard of journalism in America.
26:29
Speaker 2: And I'm a subscriber. I will remain a subscriber. I
26:32
Speaker 2: think it is great. But that, I think, is where
26:35
Speaker 2: they are wrong. Because you act one way if you
26:37
Speaker 2: think this is one interlude in American history. You act
26:42
Speaker 2: a different way if you think we are at a
26:43
Speaker 2: crossroads between what we were and something else that is
26:46
Speaker 2: much worse. And that is where the misalignment between the
26:48
Speaker 2: Times and the readers is, because people are scared shitless.
26:51
Speaker 2: They think that the country is headed in a very
26:53
Speaker 2: bad direction and that Trump is dangerous. If you think
26:56
Speaker 2: Trump is just going to go away either in 2021
27:01
Speaker 2: or sometime after that, and then life will go back
27:04
Speaker 2: to normal, then you react the way the Times is reacting.
27:06
Speaker 2: And I think that is, I disagree with their assessment,
27:10
Speaker 2: and therefore I disagree with their approach from that moment,
27:12
Speaker 2: from that point.
27:14
Speaker 1: Well, and I think that also connects with something else
27:16
Speaker 1: Dean McKay said that I thought you were going to mention,
27:19
Speaker 1: which is, he's like, you know, we're not going to,
27:24
Speaker 1: he said something like, we're not going to be the
27:26
Speaker 1: opposition party to Trump. We're not going to play the
27:30
Speaker 1: opposition Trump. We don't see that as our role. And
27:33
Speaker 1: it's sort of this thought among, and you hear this
27:36
Speaker 1: a lot from members of the media where they're like,
27:38
Speaker 1: you know, we're not on, we're not Democrats, right? Like we're,
27:41
Speaker 1: we're not members of your party. We can't win this
27:44
Speaker 1: election for you. And they think they sort of sometimes
27:46
Speaker 1: dismiss criticism about their coverage of Trump as partisan. Well,
27:51
Speaker 1: I don't have to really listen to this criticism because
27:53
Speaker 1: it's coming from Democrats. And obviously they have a political
27:56
Speaker 1: interest in Trump losing and Trump looking bad. So therefore, um,
28:01
Speaker 1: I must not be making a mistake because the criticism
28:04
Speaker 1: I'm getting is just motivated by partisanship. And again, I
28:07
Speaker 1: think that belief also flows from the belief that you
28:11
Speaker 1: were talking about, which is this isn't an extraordinary time.
28:14
Speaker 1: Because if this was an extraordinary time and Trump's presidency
28:19
Speaker 1: does represent something much different and worse than we've seen
28:23
Speaker 1: in the past, then, you know, it's not about just
28:28
Speaker 1: pure partisanship. And by the way, there's plenty of evidence
28:31
Speaker 1: that it isn't. You know, like how many more Republican
28:35
Speaker 1: strategists Republican pundits, Republican publications on the fringe. You know,
28:40
Speaker 1: you've got the Never Trump Republicans, all the other people.
28:42
Speaker 1: You've got all of these people who voted for Republicans,
28:45
Speaker 1: voted Republicans all their lives. You know, there's a story
28:48
Speaker 1: this week that Orange County, California, for the first time
28:51
Speaker 1: in history, has more Democrats than registered Republicans. All of
28:54
Speaker 1: these people are speaking out against Trump, leaving the party,
28:58
Speaker 1: changing the way they vote. You're not seeing the same
29:00
Speaker 1: kind of thing on the Democratic side at all. Clearly,
29:03
Speaker 1: there is something going on. There is a rejection to
29:05
Speaker 1: Trump that is that cuts across ideologies, that cuts across parties,
29:09
Speaker 1: that cuts across institutions. And it does seem like the
29:13
Speaker 1: media itself, or at least some legacy media, has had
29:17
Speaker 1: trouble recognizing this. Or at least they recognize it, but
29:21
Speaker 1: they still feel like they have to prize balance over
29:25
Speaker 1: everything else, even over the reality of what's going on.
29:28
Speaker 1: And striking balance is so important to them that even
29:32
Speaker 1: as Trump represents something more extreme and dangerous than ever,
29:36
Speaker 1: they still have to give both sides the same weight.
29:39
Speaker 2: Yeah, there is a, I mean, there is just this
29:40
Speaker 2: fundamental problem in journalism where too often balance is valued
29:46
Speaker 2: over accuracy. And so that's one problem. The second problem,
29:51
Speaker 2: I think, to your point, is that there is this
29:58
Speaker 2: I think on almost in some ways they have become
30:01
Speaker 2: uncomfortably numb to what is happening. And it's just whether
30:06
Speaker 2: it's just like, there's this pull to try to treat
30:10
Speaker 2: Trump as normal as possible, right? Just because it, it
30:13
Speaker 2: must be exhausting to cover this extraordinary event on a
30:17
Speaker 2: daily basis to be as scared as most Americans are.
30:20
Speaker 2: And then the third element of this is, and this,
30:22
Speaker 2: this goes to sort of the quote I highlighted from
30:24
Speaker 2: Dean McKay is I remember a in the first Obama term,
30:27
Speaker 2: we had a cabinet secretary who was sort of an
30:28
Speaker 2: old Washington hand, and he had done a handful of
30:33
Speaker 2: things that seemed not entirely in Barack Obama's interest. And
30:35
Speaker 2: I remember someone on our staff who had also been
30:40
Speaker 2: around Washington a while saying to me, so-and-so is here
30:43
Speaker 2: before Obama, and they're going to be here after Obama.
30:45
Speaker 2: And that's how they make their decisions. And I sometimes
30:47
Speaker 2: think a lot of the press, not all of the press,
30:50
Speaker 2: and we should be very clear, there are some great
30:52
Speaker 2: journals in mapping, a lot of it at the Times
30:54
Speaker 2: and other places, but There is a sort of view
30:56
Speaker 2: that they are not as affected by the policies of
31:00
Speaker 2: Trump other than his anti-press rhetoric. And therefore, they just
31:04
Speaker 2: got to get through this moment without changing who they
31:07
Speaker 2: are or changing what they have been or adjusting their
31:10
Speaker 2: strategies to reflect the new moment we are in.
31:14
Speaker 1: Well, yeah, I think there's that. And there's also, I
31:17
Speaker 1: know this, there's this belief among reporters like, well, 40%
31:20
Speaker 1: of the country, at least 40% of the country is
31:21
Speaker 1: with this guy. And so to the extent that we
31:29
Speaker 1: honestly represent just how awful and extreme he is, we
31:34
Speaker 1: are doing so knowing that half of the country, or
31:40
Speaker 1: at least almost half the country, is with this guy.
31:43
Speaker 1: And if so half the country is with this guy,
31:44
Speaker 1: then he is normalized by a lot of American citizens.
31:48
Speaker 1: And so I think it's not just this fear of Trump,
31:52
Speaker 1: and what Republican pundits will say about you, but voters,
31:57
Speaker 1: or the American people.
31:59
Speaker 2: So the Times, I saw this, Peter Baker from the
32:01
Speaker 2: Times tweeted this out the other day, that I think
32:03
Speaker 2: there's like 20, I may have the number wrong, but
32:05
Speaker 2: something like 21 million digital subscribers in the New York
32:09
Speaker 2: Times now. I would love to know what percentage of
32:14
Speaker 2: those subscribers are Trump voters.
32:18
Speaker 1: Yeah.
32:19
Speaker 2: It ain't 40%, I'll tell you that.
32:22
Speaker 1: No.
32:22
Speaker 3: No, I do not think so.
32:24
Speaker 2: I would bet it's sub-20.
32:27
Speaker 3: Yeah.
32:27
Speaker 1: And look, I mean, your job as a journalist is
32:29
Speaker 1: also not to play to the audience that subscribes to
32:33
Speaker 1: your media publication, right? Like, we want journalists to just
32:36
Speaker 1: be accurate and tell the truth regardless of who's reading them.
32:39
Speaker 1: But I also think, look, I don't expect journalists to be,
32:43
Speaker 1: you know, members of the Democratic Party to try to
32:46
Speaker 1: help us achieve you know, purely partisan ends?
32:49
Speaker 3: Of course not.
32:50
Speaker 1: I don't think that they are on our team. But
32:53
Speaker 1: there is a way to write about Trump and analyze
32:56
Speaker 1: Trump just using facts, not putting any partisan spin whatsoever
33:01
Speaker 1: that more accurately represents what an awful human being and
33:05
Speaker 1: president he is than we currently see often. That's all
33:08
Speaker 1: I'm saying. You can do it without any partisan spin whatsoever,
33:11
Speaker 1: just the facts in front of your face.
33:13
Speaker 2: Do you have any views on the... subscription canceling debate?
33:19
Speaker 3: Yeah, I don't, I mean, I, I don't think you
33:21
Speaker 3: should cancel your subscription. I don't.
33:23
Speaker 1: I mean, I think like the times does incredible journalism. Um,
33:28
Speaker 1: even if you only like it for the opinion and, and,
33:30
Speaker 1: you know, if I can, Brett Stevens or whoever else
33:32
Speaker 1: everyone's yelling about makes you tear your hair out. There's
33:34
Speaker 1: fantastic opinion columnists at the times. There's people who write
33:38
Speaker 1: for the times that are, that write some of the
33:39
Speaker 1: best journalism in the country, in the world. Um, and
33:43
Speaker 1: so I think that, Um, you know, I'm never going
33:45
Speaker 1: to unsubscribe. My job is to read the news and
33:49
Speaker 1: they produce really great news most of the time. They
33:52
Speaker 1: also drive me crazy. And I also like, I have
33:55
Speaker 1: a broader point, which is when people piss you off,
33:58
Speaker 1: I'd rather confront them and yell at them about it
34:00
Speaker 1: and try to get them and persuade them to change things,
34:02
Speaker 1: which by the way, the times did change the headline
34:04
Speaker 1: after there was the outcry. Uh, they didn't change it
34:07
Speaker 1: to something that was much better. Um, but they changed it.
34:10
Speaker 1: And so I tend to think that that's the way
34:13
Speaker 1: to get people to change their behavior. And I don't
34:15
Speaker 1: think a bunch of people on Twitter canceling their subscriptions
34:19
Speaker 1: is going to make a dent at all in sort
34:23
Speaker 1: of what the... It's not going to change the Times'
34:25
Speaker 1: behavior in any way.
34:26
Speaker 2: Yeah, I agree with that. I'm a subscriber. I'm a
34:28
Speaker 2: proud subscriber. I have not and would not encourage people
34:34
Speaker 2: to cancel. I do understand why some people would do so.
34:38
Speaker 2: The part I hated about the debate was... people raising
34:42
Speaker 2: a legitimate issue and then reporters, not from the times
34:45
Speaker 2: in this case, but from other places yelling at you
34:47
Speaker 2: and calling you stupid for wanting to change to cancel
34:50
Speaker 2: your subscription, right? Like just yelling at the consumer is
34:54
Speaker 2: a terrible business strategy. And it like, I thought that
34:59
Speaker 2: was what made the debate terrible was the reaction from
35:01
Speaker 2: a lot of journalists. The part of the reaction I
35:03
Speaker 2: did like where the people who said, if you cancel
35:06
Speaker 2: your time subscription, uh, subscribe to something else because we
35:09
Speaker 2: should support journals and whether it's your local paper or
35:11
Speaker 2: it's a progressive, um, media outlet like the nation or
35:15
Speaker 2: mother Jones or their ones who are reader supported in
35:17
Speaker 2: their entirety. Um, like that made sense. But the whole
35:20
Speaker 2: thing is like per usual, we are having an angry
35:23
Speaker 2: heated debate about one of the least important parts of
35:26
Speaker 2: the problem.
35:27
Speaker 3: Yeah.
35:28
Speaker 1: I mean, just to sort of zoom out from this,
35:30
Speaker 1: do you think that this sort of frustration with the
35:32
Speaker 1: media in general is why, uh, sort of Beto's moment
35:37
Speaker 1: about the press sort of resonated online. I saw you
35:40
Speaker 1: in the Politico piece saying that for the first time
35:43
Speaker 1: in your career, it's good politics for Democrats to rail
35:45
Speaker 1: against the media, which I thought was a very interesting point.
35:48
Speaker 2: Yes, I think there is a growing frustration and anger
35:54
Speaker 2: within Democratic activists and Democratic voters about the role the
35:58
Speaker 2: media has played in the Trump era. And like we've
36:00
Speaker 2: said before, some of it is fair, some of it
36:02
Speaker 2: is unfair. But it is real. And it is like
36:06
Speaker 2: we are sitting here screaming about what is happening in
36:08
Speaker 2: this country. Like we see this racist liar as a president.
36:12
Speaker 2: And then you have media outlets afraid to call the
36:15
Speaker 2: president a racist or a liar. And it has been bubbling.
36:20
Speaker 2: And when you raise your concerns, you get yelled at
36:22
Speaker 2: for them. That it is that you are wrong. There
36:26
Speaker 2: seems to be very little introspection there. what was, I thought,
36:29
Speaker 2: useful about what happened with the Times headlines. The Times
36:32
Speaker 2: explained what happened. The Times fired their public editor. They
36:35
Speaker 2: don't answer questions about what they did right or did wrong.
36:38
Speaker 2: I've been told by many people who work at the
36:39
Speaker 2: Times that they spent a lot of time learning lessons
36:42
Speaker 2: from 2016 and have tried to apply those to now.
36:45
Speaker 2: But no one knows that because the Times demands transparency
36:48
Speaker 2: of everyone but themselves. And this is, I think, true
36:52
Speaker 2: of a bunch of other media organizations. But I think
36:54
Speaker 2: there is a real.
36:57
Speaker 2: This is a growing problem, and I think media organizations
37:00
Speaker 2: would be remiss if they did not focus on it.
37:03
Speaker 2: I'm not saying you have to change your behavior or
37:05
Speaker 2: become liberal or anything else, but your business has become
37:09
Speaker 2: primarily driven by Democratic voters. They're the ones subscribing. They're
37:14
Speaker 2: the ones watching to non-Fox News, non-right-wing propaganda media outlets.
37:19
Speaker 2: And if they're also angry at you, you're going to
37:21
Speaker 2: find yourself with no base, with no group of people.
37:23
Speaker 3: Yeah.
37:25
Speaker 2: Beto's comments, and also by Cory Booker and others who've
37:28
Speaker 2: expressed this, reflect that anger. And that is a sea
37:32
Speaker 2: change from where things used to be.
37:34
Speaker 4: Yeah.
37:35
Speaker 1: And reflect, as you said, you could see it in
37:38
Speaker 1: Beto's frustration that we are in this, and the frustration,
37:43
Speaker 1: I'm sure, was directly related to the fact that the
37:45
Speaker 1: massacre happened in his hometown, that this is a different moment,
37:49
Speaker 1: that this is something unique and different and extreme, and
37:52
Speaker 1: that there is not a broad enough recognition of that,
37:57
Speaker 1: certainly among enough members of the media.
38:00
Speaker 2: The other thing that makes people really angry is that
38:02
Speaker 2: there is a lot of gendered, in racial stereotypes in
38:07
Speaker 2: political writing, right? It's a talk of electability, the focus
38:10
Speaker 2: on white working class voters in the Midwest, as opposed
38:14
Speaker 2: to non-voters of color or voters of color around the country.
38:19
Speaker 2: And like that, like there is an elite white privilege
38:24
Speaker 2: problem with a lot of journals and not all of it.
38:26
Speaker 2: And that also drives it, which is why you see
38:28
Speaker 2: such frustration from the supporters of women candidates like Kamala Harris,
38:33
Speaker 2: Elizabeth Warren, who often are, you find these sexist tropes
38:37
Speaker 2: in writing about their candidates. Like, are they likable enough?
38:39
Speaker 2: Are they electable enough? Are they too loud? You know,
38:42
Speaker 2: that sort of stuff. That also came as a reaction
38:45
Speaker 2: to how the 2016 election was covered.
38:48
Speaker 3: And that came through this week.
38:50
Speaker 1: You know, we said at the top of the pod
38:52
Speaker 1: that this was the worst terrorist attack on the Latino
38:57
Speaker 1: community in the United States in modern American history. And
39:01
Speaker 1: yet the coverage, or not enough coverage, I think the
39:04
Speaker 1: LA Times has done a really good job with this,
39:06
Speaker 1: but not enough of the coverage has really reflected that
39:10
Speaker 1: aspect of the story. You know, there's been a lot
39:13
Speaker 1: about Trump. Has Trump behaved well? Has he not behaved well?
39:16
Speaker 1: We just talked about that. It's a lot of talk
39:19
Speaker 1: about guns. But there hasn't been a lot of focus
39:22
Speaker 1: on the fact that this was a terrorist attack against
39:24
Speaker 1: the Latino community.
39:25
Speaker 3: It was a hate crime. And I think a lot of.
39:29
Speaker 1: Latinos in this country are rightly angered by that, that
39:33
Speaker 1: that wasn't a prominent enough angle in the coverage. One
39:39
Speaker 1: more thing before we move on to guns. Speaking of
39:43
Speaker 1: sort of Beto's response to this, how do you think
39:46
Speaker 1: the Democratic candidates as a whole have been handling this week?
39:51
Speaker 1: Do you think they've sort of risen to meet the moment?
39:54
Speaker 1: And how much should this change the race for the presidency?
40:01
Speaker 1: I'm not going to get into will or won't it,
40:03
Speaker 1: but how much should it change how they focus their
40:06
Speaker 1: time and attention?
40:08
Speaker 2: I think the Democratic candidates on the whole have risen
40:11
Speaker 2: to the moment. They have spoken out passionately and eloquently
40:17
Speaker 2: about the role of Trump's rhetoric and white nationalist political
40:22
Speaker 2: philosophy in what happened in El Paso. They have talked
40:25
Speaker 2: about the daily tragedy in this country because of the
40:30
Speaker 2: easy access to guns. And they have not hedged their bets.
40:35
Speaker 2: They have not pulled their punches. They have been strong,
40:39
Speaker 2: whether it was Elizabeth Warren and Beto O'Rourke calling Trump
40:43
Speaker 2: a white supremacist, whether it's the speech that Cory Booker gave,
40:46
Speaker 2: I believe, in South Carolina yesterday, the speech that Joe
40:49
Speaker 2: Biden gave in Iowa. People have been strong and bold,
40:53
Speaker 2: and you haven't seen political calculation enter into this moment. Look,
40:59
Speaker 2: there are lots of things to love and lots of
41:01
Speaker 2: things to criticize about people in this field, but I
41:03
Speaker 2: think on the whole, this is a moment where I
41:05
Speaker 2: was very proud of our Democratic candidates.
41:09
Speaker 1: I felt the same way to a person, every single
41:12
Speaker 1: one of them. And, you know, it's funny because I
41:14
Speaker 1: thought about how we all felt after the last debate
41:19
Speaker 1: among the Democrats and the stories were about sort of
41:21
Speaker 1: like Democratic infighting and are they attacking Barack Obama and
41:24
Speaker 1: all that bullshit. And, you know, sometimes I think it
41:26
Speaker 1: takes a moment like this and watching them all react
41:30
Speaker 1: to a moment like this that makes you think, you know,
41:32
Speaker 1: I'd be very proud for any one of them. to
41:36
Speaker 1: become president instead of fucking Donald Trump. And no matter
41:40
Speaker 1: what our differences are and what we may fight about
41:42
Speaker 1: over the next couple of months, and there will be
41:44
Speaker 1: even more fights as we get closer to the actual voting,
41:49
Speaker 1: any single one of these Democratic candidates would be infinitely
41:53
Speaker 1: better than Donald Trump. And the fate of the country,
41:57
Speaker 1: our democracy, and perhaps the world depends on one of
42:00
Speaker 1: them winning.
42:01
Speaker 3: It really does.
42:01
Speaker 1: And it really puts the intra-party fights that we have
42:05
Speaker 1: had in perspective, I think, because they are incredibly important.
42:11
Speaker 1: They will make a difference to millions of people's lives.
42:13
Speaker 1: And yet they are just all so much closer together
42:17
Speaker 1: on all of these issues than we are with the
42:21
Speaker 1: presidency that we're seeing right now. And I do think,
42:25
Speaker 1: and in terms of like whether it should change the race,
42:28
Speaker 1: you know, this is also goes back to sort of
42:30
Speaker 1: that last debate where everything seemed sort of small, like
42:34
Speaker 1: the argument seemed a little small, like everyone was going
42:37
Speaker 1: back and forth. And, you know, there's been, you know,
42:40
Speaker 1: last time when, when Donald Trump, you know, tried to,
42:43
Speaker 1: or said that those four Congresswomen of color should be,
42:46
Speaker 1: should go back where they came from. You know, there
42:49
Speaker 1: were all these pundits getting very nervous about, oh, should,
42:52
Speaker 1: you know, Donald Trump wants to put race and identity
42:55
Speaker 1: at the center of this race. Democrats shouldn't take the bait.
42:58
Speaker 1: We have to, you know, pivot to economic issues and
43:01
Speaker 1: healthcare and all the like. And of course you and
43:04
Speaker 1: I know that economic issues and healthcare are an incredibly
43:06
Speaker 1: important part of the campaign, but it does seem like
43:09
Speaker 1: there is no choice for the democratic candidates, but to
43:13
Speaker 1: confront Trump's racism head on as a central part of
43:15
Speaker 1: this campaign. Right.
43:17
Speaker 2: I don't know.
43:17
Speaker 3: I mean, what do you think?
43:18
Speaker 2: I think you, I think you have to, I think like,
43:21
Speaker 2: and we've said this before, you have to, we have
43:23
Speaker 2: a moral obligation to call it out because it is
43:27
Speaker 2: at the heart of everything that is happening. It is
43:29
Speaker 2: why everything, um, Americans were slaughtered at Walmart on a
43:34
Speaker 2: Saturday because of the color of their skin. Those things
43:38
Speaker 2: are all related. So you have to call it out.
43:40
Speaker 2: But I think you also have to explain how the
43:45
Speaker 2: impact of racism, how it fits into the larger political strategy.
43:49
Speaker 2: And that this was revealed in perhaps the most stark
43:52
Speaker 2: way possible by the rich guy who owns SoulCycle, who
43:58
Speaker 2: is hosting a fundraiser for Trump, who is come under fire.
44:01
Speaker 2: And he said, basically, I'm going to boil down his remarks,
44:06
Speaker 2: but he vehemently opposes Trump's views on race, but likes
44:11
Speaker 2: his tax cuts, and therefore he will support them. And
44:13
Speaker 2: those two things are related. It is racial grievance for
44:18
Speaker 2: the purpose of tax cuts for the rich. And so
44:20
Speaker 2: I think you have to call out the racism and
44:22
Speaker 2: explain why Trump is dividing us, what he is trying
44:25
Speaker 2: to distract from. from his corruption, from his corporatist agenda,
44:28
Speaker 2: from wanting to take your healthcare away, cut your Medicare,
44:30
Speaker 2: et cetera, because it is all of a piece and
44:33
Speaker 2: you can't do just one part of it. You have
44:34
Speaker 2: to tell the broader story.
44:37
Speaker 3: Yeah, I agree with that too.
44:38
Speaker 1: I do think that, you know, I'm, I find myself
44:41
Speaker 1: drifting further to the camp where, you know, confronting his
44:45
Speaker 1: racism head on isn't just about doing it because you
44:50
Speaker 1: have to and it's the morally right thing to do
44:52
Speaker 1: and then you pivot and say he's distracting from all
44:54
Speaker 1: these other issues, but that like, as a political strategy
44:58
Speaker 1: on its own, political in the sense that, you know,
45:01
Speaker 1: our coalition in this party is increasingly made up of
45:05
Speaker 1: younger people of color who are looking to this president
45:10
Speaker 1: and to them, his racism is a material issue. It
45:14
Speaker 1: is a life or death issue. And that if we
45:16
Speaker 1: want to, if we expect these people to come out
45:19
Speaker 1: and work hard and vote in this election, the Democratic
45:24
Speaker 1: candidates have to make sure that they are not only
45:27
Speaker 1: on the right side of this issue, but talking about
45:28
Speaker 1: it rather frequently and showing that they're passionate about it
45:32
Speaker 1: and showing that they care and showing that they think
45:34
Speaker 1: it's actually an existential issue right now for this country.
45:37
Speaker 3: I think that's part.
45:39
Speaker 1: And it's not it's not even like looking at polls
45:41
Speaker 1: to do this and like slicing and dicing the electorate.
45:43
Speaker 1: It's just it's stepping back from all this and almost
45:47
Speaker 1: just thinking to yourself is like in the most common
45:49
Speaker 1: sense way. Like, of course, this is what this election
45:52
Speaker 1: is about. you know, that we have the most racist
45:55
Speaker 1: president we've ever had in the White House and that
45:56
Speaker 1: racism is sort of flowing through all of his policies.
45:59
Speaker 1: Of course, that's what we're deciding on when we go
46:02
Speaker 1: to the polls in November of 2020. It is the
46:05
Speaker 1: referendum on that. And I just don't like we can
46:07
Speaker 1: pretend we can run ads and we can pivot. We
46:09
Speaker 1: can do all this other stuff. But I don't know
46:11
Speaker 1: how you avoid that. That is the central issue in
46:12
Speaker 1: this election.
46:13
Speaker 2: Barack Obama would always make the point that it is
46:16
Speaker 2: never a good political strategy to avoid addressing the elephant.
46:19
Speaker 3: In the room. And Trump's racism is.
46:22
Speaker 2: The giant white elephant in the room in.
46:24
Speaker 3: The 2020 election. That's right. That's exactly right.
46:27
Speaker 4: All right.
46:37
Speaker 1: So in the wake of these two mass shootings, Democrats
46:39
Speaker 1: are once again trying to pass gun safety measures and
46:41
Speaker 1: Republicans are once again trying to stop them, despite the
46:44
Speaker 1: fact that a clear majority of Americans support gun safety measures. Actually,
46:47
Speaker 1: it was published a piece on Wednesday about focus groups
46:49
Speaker 1: conducted in Minnesota that where Romney Clinton voters and Obama
46:53
Speaker 1: Trump voters all expressed that they were ready for both
46:56
Speaker 1: a ban on assault weapons and a requirement for federal
46:59
Speaker 1: background checks on all gun purchases. According to a poll
47:02
Speaker 1: released this week by Politico and Morning Consult, a majority
47:05
Speaker 1: of all voters and a majority of Republican voters would
47:08
Speaker 1: support an assault weapons ban. So it goes beyond a
47:11
Speaker 1: focus group. Dan, how have the politics around guns changed
47:15
Speaker 1: since Newtown or even Parkland? The.
47:19
Speaker 2: popular sentiment behind these obvious common sense gun control proposals
47:26
Speaker 2: have not really changed. They remain incredibly popular. The one
47:30
Speaker 2: thing that has changed is it has taken a while
47:34
Speaker 2: for the gun safety movement to catch up to the
47:39
Speaker 2: NRA in terms of funding an organization. But I think
47:41
Speaker 2: they have done that with the work that the Giffords
47:44
Speaker 2: organization has done, Everytown, the incredible work that Moms Demand
47:47
Speaker 2: has done. We can now, we've always had, or at
47:51
Speaker 2: least since Newtown, popular sentiment on our side, but the
47:55
Speaker 2: organizational and activist energy was on the side of the
47:58
Speaker 2: people who are on the side of the NRA. I
48:01
Speaker 2: think that has changed. And I'm not sure that all
48:05
Speaker 2: of the Democratic Party leadership has recognized that shift and
48:09
Speaker 2: that this is the moment to strike.
48:11
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, there's some interesting stats on the last election.
48:16
Speaker 1: Voters in 2018 favored stricter gun control by a margin
48:19
Speaker 1: of 22 percentage points, and those who did back Democrats
48:22
Speaker 1: by a margin of 76 to 22, according to exit polls.
48:26
Speaker 1: Gun policy ranked as the number four concern of voters,
48:28
Speaker 1: and voters who cited it as their top issue voted
48:30
Speaker 1: for Democrats by a margin of 70 to 29 percent.
48:34
Speaker 1: So as sort of the coalition of both parties is changing,
48:37
Speaker 1: as Democrats sort of have more suburban voters, formerly Republican
48:41
Speaker 1: voters who were in the suburbs, who were slightly wealthier,
48:44
Speaker 1: formerly independent voters, those voters, I think, care a lot
48:48
Speaker 1: more about gun control and are more favorable towards gun
48:51
Speaker 1: control and gun safety than has ever happened before.
48:54
Speaker 3: Does that seem right?
48:55
Speaker 2: Yeah, that seems right. And we have to campaign and
48:58
Speaker 2: act like it.
49:00
Speaker 3: Yeah.
49:01
Speaker 1: So why can't popular gun measures become law, right? You
49:05
Speaker 1: have Um, vast majority of the American people, you know,
49:08
Speaker 1: something like 90% want background checks, a clear majority want
49:12
Speaker 1: an assault weapons ban. And you have, you know, there's
49:16
Speaker 1: some bipartisan support in Congress for this, obviously not enough.
49:20
Speaker 1: but there's probably a majority of House members, I'd say
49:22
Speaker 1: there's a majority of House members and a majority of
49:24
Speaker 1: Senate members, members of the Senate, who want some kind
49:27
Speaker 1: of gun control.
49:28
Speaker 3: Why ain't it happening, Dan?
49:30
Speaker 2: Because America is a democracy governed by anti-democratic institutions.
49:35
Speaker 3: Yeah.
49:35
Speaker 2: I think there is no better example of the sickness
49:38
Speaker 2: at the heart of our democracy than gun control. We
49:41
Speaker 2: literally can't stop people from buying weapons of war and
49:45
Speaker 2: shooting up Walmarts because even though that's what the public wants,
49:49
Speaker 2: because our, our democratic institutions are broken and they were
49:52
Speaker 2: broken by the Republican party.
49:55
Speaker 3: Yeah.
49:55
Speaker 1: I mean, again, it comes, you know, I'm obviously a
49:58
Speaker 1: broken record on this, but it comes back to the filibuster.
50:00
Speaker 1: There is, there is no world where we pass legislation
50:06
Speaker 1: on gun control, significant, gun control, right? Like we may
50:09
Speaker 1: see in the coming weeks, you know, um, these red
50:11
Speaker 1: flag laws, you know, which they passed in Florida, which are,
50:14
Speaker 1: which are good, which, you know, make sure that people
50:16
Speaker 1: who are, um, may commit violence that seem like they're
50:20
Speaker 1: a threat to commit violence, make sure they don't have
50:22
Speaker 1: a gun, which seems like fucking common sense, but you know,
50:24
Speaker 1: still doesn't happen everywhere. Um, so you may see it
50:27
Speaker 1: like a red flag law. Um, but when you're talking
50:30
Speaker 1: background checks, when you're talking assault weapons ban, we will
50:33
Speaker 1: never see those never, as long as the filibuster is
50:37
Speaker 1: in place. We just won't. Democrats are not going to
50:42
Speaker 1: get 60 votes in the Senate in the foreseeable future.
50:47
Speaker 1: There are not enough races. There are not enough vulnerable senators.
50:50
Speaker 1: There are not enough states you can flip. Just look
50:52
Speaker 1: at the fucking map. Look at it in 20. Look
50:54
Speaker 1: at it in 22. Look at it in 24. Look
50:56
Speaker 1: at it in 26. You can look at it every
50:59
Speaker 1: single one of those years. You cannot add up. You
51:01
Speaker 1: cannot count up these Democratic senators in states that we
51:04
Speaker 1: could win and add up to 60.
51:05
Speaker 3: It cannot do it.
51:06
Speaker 2: It will not happen again in our lifetime absent a
51:10
Speaker 2: massive event. Every demographic trend is pushing against Democrats having
51:17
Speaker 2: a filibuster-proof majority in the Senate, every single one. And
51:21
Speaker 2: this is why we harp on this all the time.
51:24
Speaker 2: But if a candidate tells you they are for Medicare
51:27
Speaker 2: for all, they are for a Green New Deal, they
51:29
Speaker 2: are for gun control legislation, they are for naming a
51:33
Speaker 2: fucking post office, and they are also for keeping the filibuster,
51:36
Speaker 2: then they are selling you a bill of goods. They
51:38
Speaker 2: just are. You're not going to accomplish anything of significance
51:42
Speaker 2: to right this country, to save the fucking planet without
51:46
Speaker 2: getting rid of the filibuster. I will support whoever our
51:48
Speaker 2: Democratic nominee is, for sure. I will give to them,
51:52
Speaker 2: campaign for them, vote for them, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
51:55
Speaker 2: But I am not supporting anyone in the primary who
51:58
Speaker 2: supports the filibuster. That is tying one hand behind your
52:02
Speaker 2: back before you even get to the White House.
52:05
Speaker 1: And it was interesting when I talked to Beto on Monday,
52:07
Speaker 1: you know, he had previously been open to getting rid
52:11
Speaker 1: of the filibuster. I think he said, yeah, that's something
52:13
Speaker 1: I really want to consider. And, you know, he did
52:15
Speaker 1: have some qualification. I remember, you know, this was months
52:18
Speaker 1: ago in his answer. And when I talked to him
52:20
Speaker 1: Monday about assault weapons ban and gun control legislation, I said,
52:23
Speaker 1: would you push the Democrats in the Senate to eliminate
52:26
Speaker 1: the filibuster if you're president?
52:27
Speaker 3: He said, yes. It was not qualified. It was nothing else,
52:30
Speaker 3: just yes.
52:31
Speaker 1: And the only people that have been a clear yes
52:33
Speaker 1: on this are Elizabeth Warren, Beto O'Rourke, Jay Inslee.
52:36
Speaker 3: And Pete Buttigieg is close. Is he close-ish? Pete's very
52:40
Speaker 3: much like, yeah, it's got to go. We've got to
52:42
Speaker 3: change it.
52:43
Speaker 1: I think there was some small qualification, but he's pretty
52:45
Speaker 1: much in that category too. But it's just the four
52:47
Speaker 1: of them, really. I mean, I pushed Booker on this.
52:49
Speaker 1: He said he'd consider it. Kamala said she'd consider it,
52:52
Speaker 1: so that's good. But they're still in sort of the
52:53
Speaker 1: consider phase. You know, Biden, I think we're going to
52:57
Speaker 1: have real problems with.
52:59
Speaker 3: You know, Sanders was interesting.
53:01
Speaker 1: Sanders has got a new thing where he's talking about
53:03
Speaker 1: using reconciliation, the budget process where you only need 51
53:07
Speaker 1: votes to pass all of his big ticket items. But
53:09
Speaker 1: he's not going to be able to pass gun control
53:11
Speaker 1: through budget reconciliation. So he's going to have to get
53:14
Speaker 1: rid of the filibuster, too.
53:16
Speaker 3: They all do. It's just that that's what you have
53:17
Speaker 3: to do.
53:18
Speaker 2: I think, interestingly enough, given all of the conversations about
53:21
Speaker 2: divides in the Democratic Party, that the big divide in
53:23
Speaker 2: the party is not between liberals and moderates.
53:29
Speaker 4: Right.
53:29
Speaker 2: Or the left and the center. I think it's between
53:30
Speaker 2: the people who believe that our democracy is in peril
53:34
Speaker 2: and are willing to take on the bold Democratic reforms
53:39
Speaker 2: to address that and those who aren't. That's right. And
53:43
Speaker 2: Pete Buttigieg is a moderate candidate. Beto is– more moderate
53:47
Speaker 2: than some on issues. Elizabeth Warren is a diet and
53:50
Speaker 2: the more progressive, uh, and they believe that. And Bernie
53:53
Speaker 2: Sanders is progressive as they come has a different approach.
53:57
Speaker 2: Joe Biden, moderate, different approach. That is the dividing line
53:59
Speaker 2: that I am most interested in because that is to me,
54:01
Speaker 2: the P the difference with people who get what is
54:03
Speaker 2: happening in this country and those who are still at
54:05
Speaker 2: least somewhat blind to the challenge we face.
54:08
Speaker 3: Yeah. Or have been in the Senate for a little while.
54:11
Speaker 1: Yeah. I mean, Elizabeth Warren is the only one who's
54:14
Speaker 1: really escaped this, but, um, so, Chuck Schumer on Wednesday
54:18
Speaker 1: said the Democrats were not going to settle for half
54:20
Speaker 1: measures so Republicans can feel better and try to push
54:22
Speaker 1: the issue of gun violence off to the side and
54:24
Speaker 1: said that any red flag bill that comes to the
54:25
Speaker 1: floor must be accompanied by a vote in the House
54:28
Speaker 1: passed universal background checks legislation. Good for Chuck Schumer for
54:31
Speaker 1: saying that and making that a stand. Meanwhile, more than
54:35
Speaker 1: 200 House Democrats wrote to McConnell on Wednesday, pushing him
54:37
Speaker 1: to reconvene the Senate for an emergency session on guns.
54:41
Speaker 1: Is this a good strategy? Should Democrats be doing more?
54:45
Speaker 1: What do you think about how the Democrats are handling
54:46
Speaker 1: this in general?
54:48
Speaker 2: Not great. I think what Schumer said was right. I
54:52
Speaker 2: think the caravan that Tim Ryan and others are taking
54:55
Speaker 2: from Ohio to Kentucky is a great idea. You guys
54:58
Speaker 2: really talked about this, I thought, really well on Monday,
55:02
Speaker 2: but we have to be a vessel for the righteous
55:06
Speaker 2: anger in this country. That means recognizing it's an extraordinary
55:10
Speaker 2: moment and doing something extraordinary. I think the Democrats should
55:13
Speaker 2: cancel the August recess, come back to Washington right now,
55:16
Speaker 2: and vote, repass these bills and send them to the Senate.
55:19
Speaker 2: I think Senate Democrats should go, should be in Washington
55:23
Speaker 2: right now, pushing McConnell to hold votes. Make a Republican
55:27
Speaker 2: stay in the Senate and knock down unanimous consent requests
55:32
Speaker 2: to take up these bills all August. Some people should
55:35
Speaker 2: head to Kentucky. And if you don't want to protest
55:36
Speaker 2: outside Mitch McConnell's house, protest out the McConnell Institute at Louisville.
55:40
Speaker 2: Democratic senators should do that. Democratic members of Congress should
55:42
Speaker 2: do it. We have to draw attention to this. We
55:44
Speaker 2: have to push it. We have to put pressure on
55:46
Speaker 2: the Republicans. And The moment to permanently shift the politics,
55:52
Speaker 2: if not pass the laws, are before us right now.
55:54
Speaker 2: And even if you say McConnell will do nothing because
55:57
Speaker 2: he is a heartless, compassionless vampire, which is true, even
56:02
Speaker 2: if you say we're not going to accomplish it now,
56:04
Speaker 2: the work we do today to push this issue will
56:07
Speaker 2: make it easier for a Democratic president to do it
56:09
Speaker 2: in 2020.
56:12
Speaker 1: Being a vessel for righteous anger is probably the best
56:15
Speaker 1: advice I think you could give to the Democratic Party,
56:19
Speaker 1: especially the Democratic Party in Congress. It really sort of
56:21
Speaker 1: sums up what they should be doing on almost every issue.
56:23
Speaker 1: It goes to impeachment. It goes to all this stuff.
56:27
Speaker 1: You're right that the best that they can do is
56:29
Speaker 1: show that they're fighting. Get caught trying. Like we always
56:32
Speaker 1: said in the White House, get caught trying. And recognize
56:37
Speaker 1: that we live in a media age where the most
56:40
Speaker 1: important thing you can do is to grab, figure out
56:43
Speaker 1: ways to grab the spotlight, grab the megaphone away from
56:47
Speaker 1: Donald Trump and capture media attention, right? Like it's, it's
56:51
Speaker 1: not fun that that's what you have to do these days,
56:54
Speaker 1: but that's the world that we live in and you
56:57
Speaker 1: need to be creative and you need to think of
56:59
Speaker 1: creative ways to capture the country's attention, to capture media attention.
57:03
Speaker 1: And I don't think, I think that the democratic presidential
57:06
Speaker 1: candidates are doing a, great job of that, partly because
57:08
Speaker 1: they live in the world of campaigning and they have
57:11
Speaker 1: a bunch of strategists on their campaign who are trying
57:13
Speaker 1: to think of this stuff all the time. I think
57:15
Speaker 1: that the congressional Democrats have been behind the eight ball
57:19
Speaker 1: to say the least.
57:20
Speaker 2: It's hard. And it's harder. They have tiny little megaphones.
57:24
Speaker 2: It's like a Democratic president. Trump has this giant megaphone.
57:28
Speaker 2: The Democratic presidential general candidates have little bullhorns. Totally. And
57:33
Speaker 2: the Democratic congressional leaders are screaming into a paper bag.
57:35
Speaker 2: And so it's very hard But I think they can
57:39
Speaker 2: and should do more. And I would hope that in
57:42
Speaker 2: the coming days, they will shift strategies and do so.
57:45
Speaker 2: Because the politics are on their side. They have the
57:49
Speaker 2: moral high ground. Press your advantage now. Forget the Trump
57:54
Speaker 2: media age, the days of Facebook and Twitter. Even in
57:57
Speaker 2: the more traditional news time of the past with a
58:00
Speaker 2: normal president, it is impossible to remind people something they
58:04
Speaker 2: didn't originally know. And they don't know you passed this bill.
58:07
Speaker 2: They do not know you passed the background check bill.
58:09
Speaker 2: So you're going to have to do it again now
58:11
Speaker 2: that they're paying attention for people to know that.
58:14
Speaker 1: One last question on this. Why do you think they haven't,
58:16
Speaker 1: the Democratic House hasn't passed an assault weapons ban yet?
58:19
Speaker 2: That is a great fucking question. I have no idea.
58:21
Speaker 2: And I really don't want to know the answer because
58:23
Speaker 2: I think it would make me very mad.
58:26
Speaker 3: I don't either.
58:27
Speaker 1: Again, this is like, you know, 70% recent polls, 70%
58:31
Speaker 1: of all voters back in assault weapons ban, 55% of Republicans.
58:35
Speaker 1: Fifty five percent of Republicans back in assault weapons ban.
58:40
Speaker 3: What are you doing?
58:40
Speaker 1: I realize there's some tough districts out there for Democrats.
58:43
Speaker 1: I realize that, you know, that's going to be the answer.
58:45
Speaker 4: Right.
58:46
Speaker 3: Some of these are in very and it's not the
58:48
Speaker 3: Clinton Romney district.
58:49
Speaker 1: It's not the suburbs that they're talking about. Those I
58:51
Speaker 1: bet Katie Porter and all the rest of them, the
58:54
Speaker 1: Crooked Seven, who won in California, would be probably fine
58:56
Speaker 1: with an assault weapons ban. It's the Democrats that are
58:58
Speaker 1: stuck in these Obama Trump districts in the Midwest and
59:01
Speaker 1: more rural areas. And I'm sure they are terrified of
59:03
Speaker 1: an assault weapons ban, but I don't know that they
59:05
Speaker 1: need to be.
59:06
Speaker 2: They don't.
59:06
Speaker 3: Do you?
59:07
Speaker 2: No, this is the danger of having... congressional leaders who've
59:12
Speaker 2: been around forever because they were all around, whether it
59:15
Speaker 2: is Schumer to Pelosi to Hoyer to Clyburn, all of
59:18
Speaker 2: us were around in the 1994 crime bill, which included
59:21
Speaker 2: the assault weapons ban. And then a large portion of
59:24
Speaker 2: their colleagues lost their seats in Now, they lost receipts
59:27
Speaker 2: for many reasons, but in the history and narrative as
59:30
Speaker 2: was written, they lost it because they were tough on guns.
59:33
Speaker 2: And that fundamentally shifted the Democratic approach on guns for years.
59:36
Speaker 2: And then Columbine happened, and Democrats started talking about guns again.
59:40
Speaker 2: And then Al Gore lost, and he lost states the
59:42
Speaker 2: Democrats used to win, like West Virginia and his home
59:45
Speaker 2: state of Tennessee, and the narrative was guns. And that
59:49
Speaker 2: once again... made us more reticent. And then we started
59:52
Speaker 2: talking about it again after Newtown, and then Democrats lost again,
59:56
Speaker 2: including in all of these rural areas, the narrative was guns.
59:59
Speaker 2: When that is not actually the case, there are more
1:00:01
Speaker 2: complicated reasons why people lose elections. And of all of
1:00:04
Speaker 2: the gun control bills, the assault weapons ban seems like
1:00:07
Speaker 2: the easiest sell. And I recognize there are challenges with implementation,
1:00:10
Speaker 2: and the last one was imperfect. But people don't need
1:00:14
Speaker 2: a weapon of war to go hunting. They don't need
1:00:16
Speaker 2: a weapon of war to protect their house. And The
1:00:19
Speaker 2: Dayton example is the best one for why we shouldn't
1:00:22
Speaker 2: have weapons like that, which is the police were on
1:00:25
Speaker 2: the scene when it happened, and all those people got
1:00:29
Speaker 2: shot in under a minute because of that weapon. That
1:00:33
Speaker 2: is a policy choice we make as a country, and unfortunately,
1:00:36
Speaker 2: we can lay all of this at the feet of
1:00:37
Speaker 2: the Republicans, but on the question of the assault weapons ban,
1:00:41
Speaker 2: it is a policy choice the Democratic Party also made,
1:00:43
Speaker 2: and that is problematic.
1:00:44
Speaker 1: Yeah. Just go look at that Axios story, that focus group.
1:00:48
Speaker 1: Listen to these Obama Trump voters. These are people who
1:00:52
Speaker 1: voted for Donald Trump in Minnesota, pretty rural area, Minnesota.
1:00:57
Speaker 1: And they're sitting there saying, yeah, absolutely. No one needs
1:00:59
Speaker 1: a weapon like that. Of course we should ban those.
1:01:02
Speaker 1: I mean, what else do you need to hear?
1:01:04
Speaker 3: All right.
1:01:05
Speaker 1: Let's talk about 2020. Over the last few weeks, there's
1:01:08
Speaker 1: been a rush of House Republicans heading for the exits.
1:01:11
Speaker 1: About a dozen GOP lawmakers have announced that they won't
1:01:14
Speaker 1: be running for reelection next year, including a cluster of
1:01:16
Speaker 1: Republicans from Texas. Will Hurd, the only African-American Republican in
1:01:20
Speaker 1: the House, is among them. Democrats flipped several congressional seats
1:01:23
Speaker 1: in Texas in 2018 and came the closest to winning
1:01:26
Speaker 1: a statewide race for Senate that they've been in decades.
1:01:28
Speaker 1: There are 38 electoral votes at stake in Texas in
1:01:32
Speaker 1: next year's presidential race. Dan, why are so many House
1:01:34
Speaker 1: Republicans retiring? And what does that mean for the House
1:01:37
Speaker 1: map in 2020?
1:01:38
Speaker 2: Because as a Republican, you only have two choices. Actively
1:01:41
Speaker 2: enable Trump's racism, corruption, and incompetence, or quit the party.
1:01:45
Speaker 3: Yeah, bend the knee or head for the exits. That's it.
1:01:50
Speaker 3: That is the only that is the only option you have.
1:01:53
Speaker 4: Yeah.
1:01:53
Speaker 1: I mean, like some of these it seems like some
1:01:54
Speaker 1: of these members were critical of Trump, have been critical
1:01:57
Speaker 1: of Trump in the past. A couple of them, you know,
1:02:01
Speaker 1: voted against him. And then some just faced tough reelection
1:02:04
Speaker 1: in some of these tough, moderate suburban districts. And then
1:02:08
Speaker 1: for some of them, it was both.
1:02:10
Speaker 4: Right.
1:02:10
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that's right. And so, right. Some of
1:02:12
Speaker 2: these districts will just be replaced by another Republican will
1:02:14
Speaker 2: be competitive. A lot of the ones in Texas represent
1:02:18
Speaker 2: the rapid shift of the politics in Texas, where districts
1:02:24
Speaker 2: that had been solidly red became less red and now
1:02:26
Speaker 2: are moving to purple, if not light blue. And that's
1:02:28
Speaker 2: very worrisome to people, and they'd rather quit than lose.
1:02:32
Speaker 2: I do think, and we should just note, that most
1:02:35
Speaker 2: of these people who are quitting think Trump is a
1:02:38
Speaker 2: dangerously unfit racist. And instead of doing anything about that,
1:02:43
Speaker 2: of using the power granted to them by the Constitution
1:02:46
Speaker 2: to hold him accountable or use the platform they have
1:02:49
Speaker 2: as a member of Congress, they would rather quit and
1:02:50
Speaker 2: become lobbyists. And that is fucking gross.
1:02:53
Speaker 3: Very telling.
1:02:55
Speaker 1: Just so everyone gets an idea of what the House
1:02:56
Speaker 1: map looks like, the Republicans need to flip 19 or
1:02:59
Speaker 1: 20 seats in 2020. I say 19 or 20 because
1:03:03
Speaker 1: it depends on the results of the special election that
1:03:05
Speaker 1: will be held in the North Carolina's 9th district in September.
1:03:09
Speaker 1: which you can hear more about on Crooked Minis. We
1:03:12
Speaker 1: have a series about how the NC9 was rigged and
1:03:16
Speaker 1: what's going on there, narrated by Shaniqua McClendon, our political director.
1:03:20
Speaker 3: Check it out. It's excellent.
1:03:21
Speaker 2: NC9 sounds like a TV show on the CBS network.
1:03:26
Speaker 2: I know.
1:03:26
Speaker 3: I feel like we should take it out.
1:03:29
Speaker 1: So Republicans are going to mainly target 31 Democrats who
1:03:33
Speaker 1: currently represent districts that Trump carried in 2016. Of course,
1:03:37
Speaker 1: the problem for the Republicans is some of those districts
1:03:39
Speaker 1: or suburbs that are trending towards the Democrats. But that's
1:03:42
Speaker 1: sort of their target list. You talked about Texas. So
1:03:46
Speaker 1: three of the retirements came in Texas. Will Hurd, Kenny
1:03:50
Speaker 1: Marchant and Pete Olson. And there are six incumbent Texas
1:03:55
Speaker 1: Republicans in the House who kept their seats by less
1:03:58
Speaker 1: than five points in 2018. Dan, what's going on with Texas?
1:04:02
Speaker 1: Why is the state getting bluer?
1:04:04
Speaker 2: Well, it is dealing with a fundamental shift in two ways. One,
1:04:09
Speaker 2: you have more college-educated voters moving into the suburbs. Texas,
1:04:15
Speaker 2: I think 70, I saw this really interesting set of
1:04:17
Speaker 2: stats from Dave Wasserman at the Cook Report, who you
1:04:20
Speaker 2: can follow on Twitter at Redistrict, talking about why Arizona
1:04:24
Speaker 2: and Texas are targets for Democrats. Because Democrats do better
1:04:28
Speaker 2: in major metro areas, the cities and the surrounding suburbs.
1:04:31
Speaker 2: And 72% of the vote in Texas comes from those
1:04:35
Speaker 2: urban areas, those metro areas. And so Democrats, or Texas
1:04:39
Speaker 2: is becoming more diverse, but it's also, the white vote
1:04:42
Speaker 2: is also dramatically shifting in Texas. And so it's, you know,
1:04:45
Speaker 2: it was the state that moved the furthest in the
1:04:47
Speaker 2: Democratic column in 2016. Obviously, Beto came very close to
1:04:51
Speaker 2: winning it in 2018. And there is a sense of panic,
1:04:55
Speaker 2: both among these individual members in the Republican Party writ
1:04:57
Speaker 2: large about where the crown jewel of their electoral college
1:05:01
Speaker 2: strategy is headed.
1:05:04
Speaker 1: I found that stat about what percentage of the vote
1:05:07
Speaker 1: comes from the cities in each state to be fascinating,
1:05:11
Speaker 1: because it also, you know, they had Wisconsin and Michigan
1:05:14
Speaker 1: and Pennsylvania up there, and then they had Minnesota, and
1:05:17
Speaker 1: something like 60% of the vote in Minnesota comes from
1:05:21
Speaker 1: the cities in Which tells you why, even though it's
1:05:24
Speaker 1: another Midwestern state like the other ones, it didn't flip
1:05:26
Speaker 1: to Donald Trump. Because less of the vote comes from
1:05:29
Speaker 1: cities in Wisconsin, especially, where he won. And when you
1:05:33
Speaker 1: look at the high, high percentage of the vote that
1:05:36
Speaker 1: comes from cities in Texas and Arizona, you really do
1:05:39
Speaker 1: see that those states are trending Democratic in a big way.
1:05:43
Speaker 1: Because if you live in an urban area, you are
1:05:46
Speaker 1: not only likely to vote Democratic, but by a very
1:05:49
Speaker 1: wide margin. Republicans are becoming largely extinct in some of
1:05:52
Speaker 1: these urban areas. Now, the flip side of that is
1:05:55
Speaker 1: places where the vote is coming in, in mostly small
1:06:00
Speaker 1: towns and rural areas, Democrats are having an even harder
1:06:03
Speaker 1: time winning. And so you're sort of seeing this polarization.
1:06:06
Speaker 2: Yeah, we're undergoing a fundamental realignment of the electorate right now.
1:06:12
Speaker 2: It started in 2008. It moved to 2012. We saw...
1:06:19
Speaker 2: the impacts in a negative way in 2016, but it, it,
1:06:22
Speaker 2: things are changing where democratic votes come from is shifting
1:06:24
Speaker 2: where Republican votes are come from or shifting. And that
1:06:26
Speaker 2: is going to over time affect electoral college strategies. And
1:06:30
Speaker 2: the real question is whether Texas and Arizona become blue
1:06:34
Speaker 2: before the Midwest becomes solidly red. Like that's the race
1:06:38
Speaker 2: of the demographic race that's happening within, within American politics.
1:06:42
Speaker 1: And just to underscore how important that is, if we,
1:06:45
Speaker 1: if Democrats win Texas and Arizona, in a presidential race,
1:06:50
Speaker 1: you could hit 270, you'd hit 271. If you then
1:06:55
Speaker 1: lost Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida, and Minnesota, you could lose
1:07:01
Speaker 1: all five of those states, win Texas and Arizona, and
1:07:05
Speaker 1: still win the Electoral College if all the other states
1:07:09
Speaker 1: in 2016 remain the same. That is why Texas, people
1:07:12
Speaker 1: focus so much on Texas as this big prize. The
1:07:15
Speaker 1: question is, Dan, do you think Democrats could win in
1:07:19
Speaker 1: Texas in 2020?
1:07:22
Speaker 2: Yes. I think it is a long shot for them
1:07:25
Speaker 2: to do so. And there's going to be a fundamental
1:07:27
Speaker 2: resources question because Texas is so big and so expensive.
1:07:30
Speaker 2: It'll be a real question for the Democratic nominee, the
1:07:34
Speaker 2: Democratic Party, and affiliated super PACs whether they're willing to
1:07:38
Speaker 2: spend the money to do so. And I would be
1:07:41
Speaker 2: very interested to see polling. Like, will we compete in Florida?
1:07:46
Speaker 2: Or is Florida moving in the wrong direction? will those
1:07:48
Speaker 2: resources go to Texas? Arizona is a safer bet because
1:07:53
Speaker 2: it is smaller, there are fewer media markets, it's simply
1:07:56
Speaker 2: cheaper to do and easier to organize.
1:07:58
Speaker 1: And Kyrsten Sinema won there in 2018. We have a
1:08:00
Speaker 1: Democrat who won there now.
1:08:01
Speaker 2: That's right. I mean, but, and the argument against Texas is,
1:08:05
Speaker 2: even though Hillary Clinton did much better than Barack Obama,
1:08:07
Speaker 2: she still lost by nine. And nine points would be
1:08:10
Speaker 2: a long way for the state to go in a
1:08:13
Speaker 2: short period of time, but that has happened in the past.
1:08:15
Speaker 2: I mean, those Midwestern states like Iowa and Ohio, shifted
1:08:18
Speaker 2: more than nine points in the Republican direction in 2016.
1:08:21
Speaker 2: So it is possible, and it's going to be a
1:08:24
Speaker 2: question of resources and whether the Democratic candidate can put
1:08:27
Speaker 2: together this sort of coalition that can win Texas, which
1:08:30
Speaker 2: is one that is similar to the one that Beto
1:08:33
Speaker 2: has put together in 2018, which is really excite the
1:08:37
Speaker 2: Democratic base and turn out new voters and be able
1:08:39
Speaker 2: to win a significant majority of independents. And we'll have
1:08:43
Speaker 2: to see if our nominee can do that.
1:08:45
Speaker 1: I think that is sort of the big question with
1:08:47
Speaker 1: Texas is everyone sort of digs into the numbers is
1:08:50
Speaker 1: how much of 2018 was Beto responsible for as a
1:08:54
Speaker 1: candidate and how much was larger demographic forces in Texas.
1:09:00
Speaker 1: that are moving towards the Democrat. Because I think that
1:09:02
Speaker 1: matters a lot when you think about, A, can a
1:09:06
Speaker 1: Democrat win the Senate race in 2020 against John Cornyn?
1:09:11
Speaker 1: And B, can whoever the Democratic nominee is carry Texas
1:09:15
Speaker 1: in the general? And, you know, there's, I think, The
1:09:18
Speaker 1: short answer is both, right? Some of it had to
1:09:21
Speaker 1: do with Beto as a candidate in his campaign, and
1:09:24
Speaker 1: some of it had to do with demographic changes. But
1:09:27
Speaker 1: Nate Cohn dug into this a couple months ago, and
1:09:32
Speaker 1: he thinks that Beto would have won the race with
1:09:35
Speaker 1: 2020 turnout, and that where Beto really overperformed was among
1:09:40
Speaker 1: white voters, college-educated white voters, and they basically got him
1:09:43
Speaker 1: super close. And also with crossover voters, he got about 500,000
1:09:46
Speaker 1: votes that....
1:09:48
Speaker 3: The Republican governor, Greg Abbott, got.
1:09:51
Speaker 1: So 500,000 people voted for Greg Abbott, that fucking guy,
1:09:55
Speaker 1: and voted for Beto O'Rourke. But Beto didn't get this
1:09:59
Speaker 1: surge of Hispanic turnout that usually happens in a presidential year,
1:10:04
Speaker 1: but not in a Senate year.
1:10:07
Speaker 3: What's your read on all that?
1:10:08
Speaker 2: I think the challenge for a Democrat in 2020 is
1:10:14
Speaker 2: that 500,000 Abbott or Rourke voters, which I think is
1:10:20
Speaker 2: very tied to Ted Cruz being the most unlikable person
1:10:24
Speaker 2: walking the face of the planet. I think Trump gets
1:10:30
Speaker 2: a large portion of those voters back because there's something
1:10:34
Speaker 2: very specific about Cruz. Now, is there enough outstanding Latino
1:10:43
Speaker 2: drop-off vote or new voters to make up that delta? Yes,
1:10:45
Speaker 2: absolutely there is. So that's why it is possible. But
1:10:49
Speaker 2: that 500,000 number is very significant, I think, and it
1:10:52
Speaker 2: is not easily replicable by any candidate running– by a
1:10:56
Speaker 2: Democratic nominee in 2020, even better.
1:11:01
Speaker 1: The only thing that gives me pause on that is
1:11:04
Speaker 1: Ted Cruz's approval rating on Election Day in 2018 was
1:11:07
Speaker 1: actually– above water, even though everyone says he's like the
1:11:10
Speaker 1: most unpopular person ever.
1:11:11
Speaker 3: It was like 50-49.
1:11:12
Speaker 1: It's pretty close, but it was slightly above water. And
1:11:15
Speaker 1: Trump's approval rating on Election Day in 2018 was slightly
1:11:18
Speaker 1: below water. It was at 49% where it exists today.
1:11:22
Speaker 1: And so, you know, there's some belief that it wasn't
1:11:27
Speaker 1: necessarily Ted Cruz's unpopularity that helped Beto in 2018, but
1:11:31
Speaker 1: Donald Trump's unpopularity that helped Beto and a lot of
1:11:34
Speaker 1: these other congressional candidates who won in 2018.
1:11:36
Speaker 3: Now, Donald Trump also wasn't at the top of the ticket.
1:11:40
Speaker 3: So you're right.
1:11:40
Speaker 1: When Donald Trump is at the top of the ticket
1:11:42
Speaker 1: and not just, um, in the background, maybe voting changes,
1:11:46
Speaker 1: but I don't know.
1:11:46
Speaker 3: It was something that I thought about. Yeah.
1:11:48
Speaker 2: It's in the, like, it is a, the fact that
1:11:50
Speaker 2: Texas is in discussion of being a battleground state in
1:11:55
Speaker 2: 2020 is a pretty dramatic statement that people would have
1:11:59
Speaker 2: thought you were insane to say, like, obviously Democrats have
1:12:02
Speaker 2: talked about this. It's the great, you know, white whale
1:12:04
Speaker 2: of electoral politics and, forever, and we've talked about it
1:12:07
Speaker 2: since 2012, and always poo-pooed by the people who look
1:12:12
Speaker 2: at the math. But now that the people who look
1:12:13
Speaker 2: at the math say, you're in the neighborhood of possibly
1:12:16
Speaker 2: making it possible, it speaks to a really dramatic shift
1:12:19
Speaker 2: that should really scare Republicans, if not in 2020, over
1:12:23
Speaker 2: the long term.
1:12:25
Speaker 3: Yeah. Okay.
1:12:27
Speaker 1: When we come back, we will have Dan's conversation with
1:12:30
Speaker 1: The New Yorker's Jane Mayer.
1:12:40
Speaker 2: We are joined today by Jane Mayer, the chief Washington
1:12:44
Speaker 2: correspondent of The New Yorker. Jane, thanks so much for
1:12:46
Speaker 2: being on Pod Save America.
1:12:47
Speaker 4: Great to be with you, Dan.
1:12:50
Speaker 2: We wanted to have you on this week because there's
1:12:53
Speaker 2: been so much conversation in the wake of what happened
1:12:56
Speaker 2: in El Paso about Trump's rhetoric and the entities like
1:13:00
Speaker 2: Fox News that have amplified that rhetoric. And you have
1:13:04
Speaker 2: studied the relationship between Fox News and this White House
1:13:07
Speaker 2: as closely as anyone has. I was wondering if you
1:13:09
Speaker 2: could give our readers, I know you covered this in
1:13:12
Speaker 2: your New Yorker article a while back, but give our
1:13:16
Speaker 2: readers a summary of just how close Fox News and
1:13:18
Speaker 2: this White House is.
1:13:20
Speaker 4: Well, they're really so interwoven. Sometimes it's hard to see
1:13:23
Speaker 4: where one ends and the other begins. So that you've
1:13:26
Speaker 4: got basically Sean Hannity, who's got the highest rated program
1:13:31
Speaker 4: on Fox, on the phone almost every night with Trump,
1:13:36
Speaker 4: according to Hannity. So The two of them speak all
1:13:39
Speaker 4: the time. The producers speak often to the people in
1:13:42
Speaker 4: the White House. There's kind of a revolving door back
1:13:44
Speaker 4: and forth of personnel. And there's a sort of a
1:13:48
Speaker 4: syncing that is S-Y-N-C-H-I-N-G of the kind of the line
1:13:54
Speaker 4: of the day.
1:13:54
Speaker 2: Is there a level of discomfort? Like you mentioned Hannity.
1:13:58
Speaker 2: We know that Lou Dobbs, who's on the Fox Business Network,
1:14:01
Speaker 2: has been dialed into White House meetings. one of the
1:14:04
Speaker 2: hosts of Fox & Friends has been floated for numerous
1:14:07
Speaker 2: administration positions. Are there any people within Fox who are
1:14:11
Speaker 2: uncomfortable with this relationship, or is this just sort of
1:14:14
Speaker 2: how business is done these days?
1:14:16
Speaker 4: No, there are. And, I mean, people don't realize often
1:14:21
Speaker 4: when they talk about Fox News, there's sort of two
1:14:23
Speaker 4: parts of it. There's the talk show hosts who really
1:14:26
Speaker 4: are opinionated and kind of completely separate from having to
1:14:33
Speaker 4: even worry about being factually accurate. And then there is
1:14:36
Speaker 4: the news side that sort of does some of the
1:14:38
Speaker 4: straighter news shows during the days. Reporters for the news side,
1:14:43
Speaker 4: to some extent, have voiced discomfort with what's going on.
1:14:49
Speaker 4: They want to be able to have some independence, just
1:14:52
Speaker 4: as all reporters are supposed to. And then occasionally you
1:14:55
Speaker 4: have someone like Chris Wallace, who's a He's conservative, but
1:15:01
Speaker 4: he's an excellent interviewer and wants to be able to
1:15:04
Speaker 4: hold people accountable in the Trump administration as well as elsewhere.
1:15:07
Speaker 2: And does he get pushback from the top on that? Because,
1:15:12
Speaker 2: I mean, I know people.
1:15:13
Speaker 4: Actually, recently there's been pushback from Trump on it. Trump's
1:15:17
Speaker 4: been tweeting some complaints about Fox News. Occasionally he seems
1:15:23
Speaker 4: peeved whenever Fox News sort of pokes him in any
1:15:28
Speaker 4: way because he seems to think that he owns it
1:15:31
Speaker 4: and gets angry with him when they're off the reservation.
1:15:36
Speaker 2: Do you have a sense of how Fox reacts to that?
1:15:38
Speaker 2: Does that make them nervous? Is that a business risk
1:15:42
Speaker 2: for them? I mean, I.
1:15:45
Speaker 4: Think that Fox is bigger and has a longer vision
1:15:51
Speaker 4: than just Trump TV. Right now, it looks like Trump
1:15:56
Speaker 4: TV to many people, but presumably at some point, Trump
1:16:00
Speaker 4: will no longer be president and Fox will continue. And
1:16:04
Speaker 4: so it needs to be able to look beyond Trump.
1:16:08
Speaker 4: And so, you know, its ambitions are greater than just Trump,
1:16:13
Speaker 4: and its ambitions are global.
1:16:14
Speaker 2: I mean, it is, Fox has had several iterations, right?
1:16:19
Speaker 2: There was when it first started, and then there was
1:16:21
Speaker 2: the post-9-11 iteration. sort of organ of the Bush war machine,
1:16:27
Speaker 2: Fox News. Then there was the reaction to Obama, Fox News,
1:16:32
Speaker 2: and now there is the pro-Trump Fox News. What do
1:16:35
Speaker 2: people within Fox think comes after Trump for Fox?
1:16:41
Speaker 4: Well, I mean, when we talk about Fox now, we're
1:16:43
Speaker 4: talking about there's also a generational shift within the running
1:16:47
Speaker 4: of Fox. Rupert Murdoch, its founder, is very old and
1:16:52
Speaker 4: has had some brushes with really serious health problems. And
1:16:56
Speaker 4: his son, Lachlan, is now the CEO and sort of
1:17:02
Speaker 4: the rising force within Fox. And so So really the
1:17:05
Speaker 4: question of its future revolves to a large extent on
1:17:09
Speaker 4: what Lachlan's vision is. And you can see some of
1:17:12
Speaker 4: that by seeing what Lachlan did when he was running
1:17:18
Speaker 4: his news enterprises in Australia. What he did was he
1:17:22
Speaker 4: is very much someone who has tried to profit off
1:17:28
Speaker 4: of anti-immigrant sentiment, fan the flames of sort of xenophobia,
1:17:33
Speaker 4: and kind of white grievance. And so, I mean, it's
1:17:40
Speaker 4: in line with the Fox that we know, but it
1:17:42
Speaker 4: may be even more toxic in some ways. That's what
1:17:46
Speaker 4: we're all watching to try to see what the future
1:17:48
Speaker 4: might be there.
1:17:50
Speaker 2: That's very interesting and I think important to know because
1:17:56
Speaker 2: from its inception, Fox really, I think a lot of
1:18:00
Speaker 2: us thought, represented the worldview and political strategy of Roger Ailes.
1:18:04
Speaker 2: And there was always this gap between Ailes and Murdoch. Murdoch,
1:18:08
Speaker 2: who had been a vocal supporter of comprehensive immigration reform,
1:18:12
Speaker 2: had even made some mutterings about better gun safety laws
1:18:16
Speaker 2: in this country. And so there was this view that
1:18:19
Speaker 2: maybe a post-Ailes Fox would be different, but it has
1:18:24
Speaker 2: actually gotten exponentially worse. And that is because of Lachlan,
1:18:28
Speaker 2: you're saying?
1:18:29
Speaker 4: Well, it's partly because of Lachlan, but it's also, I mean,
1:18:32
Speaker 4: I had the same question you had, I think, probably,
1:18:34
Speaker 4: and many people have who take a look at Fox.
1:18:36
Speaker 4: You know, we all know that it's founded by an
1:18:40
Speaker 4: immigrant to America, Rupert Murdoch, and that he has actually
1:18:46
Speaker 4: spoken up on behalf of immigrants from time to time.
1:18:50
Speaker 4: and even criticized Trump before Trump was president on this issue.
1:18:55
Speaker 4: And at some point when Trump was talking about how
1:18:58
Speaker 4: immigrants from Mexico are criminals and rapists, I think it
1:19:01
Speaker 4: was in 2015, Rupert Murdoch tweeted back something about how
1:19:06
Speaker 4: actually immigrants from Mexico, like most immigrants, have lower crime
1:19:11
Speaker 4: rates than native-born Americans. So we know that Murdoch has
1:19:15
Speaker 4: a more level-headed view and a more positive view of immigration,
1:19:20
Speaker 4: more accurate view factually of immigration in terms of crime.
1:19:26
Speaker 4: And yet his network has done more than almost any
1:19:30
Speaker 4: you can think of to really fan xenophobia and anti-immigrant sentiment.
1:19:36
Speaker 4: So when I was writing that, Fox, I was trying
1:19:38
Speaker 4: to understand how did he rationalize the two? And I
1:19:43
Speaker 4: interviewed a lot of people at Fox, and one of
1:19:45
Speaker 4: them was Greta Van Susseren, who used to host a
1:19:47
Speaker 4: show there and then went on to host one at MSNBC,
1:19:50
Speaker 4: and she worked in other networks. And she said basically, hey, kid,
1:19:55
Speaker 4: don't kid yourself. It's about the bottom line. With Rupert Murdoch,
1:20:01
Speaker 4: it's about the bottom line. And I think the same
1:20:03
Speaker 4: is probably true of his son, Lachlan. There's a tremendous
1:20:07
Speaker 4: amount of money to be made by fanning fear. It
1:20:12
Speaker 4: glues people's eyeballs to their screens. It brings viewers and
1:20:17
Speaker 4: holds viewers. And really, that is the business plan that
1:20:23
Speaker 4: Fox follows. And so... If you take a look at
1:20:28
Speaker 4: the Murdochs as people who are interested primarily in making money,
1:20:33
Speaker 4: so long as that kind of politics draws viewers, that's
1:20:37
Speaker 4: what they're going to do.
1:20:39
Speaker 2: As I mentioned earlier, there's been a lot of discussion
1:20:42
Speaker 2: about the connection between what happened in El Paso and
1:20:46
Speaker 2: some of the rhetoric that came out of the president's
1:20:47
Speaker 2: mouth and on Fox. Do you see a connection in
1:20:52
Speaker 2: some of the verbiage in the El Paso manifesto and
1:20:56
Speaker 2: the messaging on Fox?
1:20:58
Speaker 4: Yeah, I think there's a really disturbing echo of what
1:21:02
Speaker 4: you hear on Fox in the El Paso Shooters manifesto.
1:21:07
Speaker 4: Incredibly disturbing. And what we've seen is that Fox increasingly
1:21:14
Speaker 4: is giving a platform to white nationalists and to the
1:21:17
Speaker 4: rhetoric of white nationalists. And in this year of 2019,
1:21:22
Speaker 4: before the El Paso shooting happened, there were at least
1:21:28
Speaker 4: 70 references on air on Fox to immigrants, um, as
1:21:34
Speaker 4: being an invasion of some sort using this kind of,
1:21:38
Speaker 4: you know, military threat language in discussion of immigration. Um,
1:21:42
Speaker 4: it's the kind of thing that stirs hatred and fear. And, um,
1:21:47
Speaker 4: you know, so yes, there's, there seems to be a very, very, um, um,
1:21:51
Speaker 4: disturbing echo there.
1:21:54
Speaker 2: There has been a lot of efforts, um, to organize
1:21:59
Speaker 2: advertiser boycotts or put pressure on advertisers from these companies
1:22:02
Speaker 2: who proclaim in their core values that they're for diversity
1:22:06
Speaker 2: or they're for immigration reform, but advertise on Fox News.
1:22:08
Speaker 2: There's been some success, at least, in some advertisers backing
1:22:11
Speaker 2: off at least the more toxic shows, as I would
1:22:14
Speaker 2: refer to them. But Fox is still doing quite well business-wise,
1:22:18
Speaker 2: or do they feel any business pressure at all?
1:22:20
Speaker 4: You know, I think the advertiser boycotts are, as much
1:22:24
Speaker 4: as anything, a public relations problem for Fox, more than
1:22:29
Speaker 4: almost a serious business concern. One of the people who is,
1:22:34
Speaker 4: I'm trying to think how to say this, somebody who's
1:22:38
Speaker 4: very close into the Murdoch family said to me, that
1:22:42
Speaker 4: the advertisers will maybe withdraw their advertising from whatever show
1:22:47
Speaker 4: is considered offensive at that moment and then move the
1:22:51
Speaker 4: dollars to another Fox show. So it doesn't actually necessarily
1:22:55
Speaker 4: hurt Fox that much. Fox is quite cynical about these boycotts,
1:23:00
Speaker 4: but it does give them a black eye, and it's
1:23:04
Speaker 4: a public relations problem.
1:23:08
Speaker 2: You mentioned Chris Wallace. Shep Smith is another Fox personality
1:23:12
Speaker 2: who has, at least at times, expressed taking less of
1:23:17
Speaker 2: the party line when it relates to Trump. I often
1:23:21
Speaker 2: wonder how it is that a lot of these folks
1:23:25
Speaker 2: who view themselves as journalists, even if they may be
1:23:30
Speaker 2: personally conservative, they view themselves as journalists. How... You know,
1:23:35
Speaker 2: whether there is a growing sense of discomfort within the
1:23:38
Speaker 2: news side to the things being said on the opinion side,
1:23:41
Speaker 2: because the opinion side, or is it just sort of
1:23:42
Speaker 2: this is the nature of doing business because the opinion
1:23:44
Speaker 2: side pays for a lot of the news side? Like,
1:23:48
Speaker 2: is there any chance that someone's going to quit, right,
1:23:50
Speaker 2: in anger or frustration at what both the racism that
1:23:55
Speaker 2: is happening in the evenings, but also just sort of
1:23:59
Speaker 2: the propaganda that happens during the day, even on the
1:24:01
Speaker 2: news side?
1:24:03
Speaker 4: I mean, over the years, there have been people who
1:24:05
Speaker 4: have quit occasionally. I mean, you've got the instance of
1:24:08
Speaker 4: Alison Camerata, who's a terrific host now on CNN. And
1:24:13
Speaker 4: she has spoken out, and I actually interviewed her for
1:24:15
Speaker 4: my piece. And, you know, she wanted to be at
1:24:21
Speaker 4: a more respectable news organization where a serious journalist can work.
1:24:27
Speaker 4: And she has talked about that.
1:24:28
Speaker 1: And.
1:24:30
Speaker 4: And actually shed a lot of light on what happens
1:24:33
Speaker 4: over at Fox, which is really, some of their news
1:24:36
Speaker 4: practices are really disturbing if you take journalism seriously.
1:24:41
Speaker 2: I also wonder sometimes if the Megyn Kelly experience is
1:24:46
Speaker 2: a lesson for some folks at Fox that there may
1:24:48
Speaker 2: not be life after Fox, that you have been poisoned
1:24:52
Speaker 2: to the fact that it is hard to succeed in
1:24:55
Speaker 2: a more traditional news environment after the Trump era, right?
1:24:58
Speaker 2: Like when Allison left Fox was still known as really
1:25:01
Speaker 2: bad to a lot of people, but it was, I think,
1:25:03
Speaker 2: less publicly toxic than it is now.
1:25:06
Speaker 4: Yeah, I mean, I would think people going to Fox
1:25:08
Speaker 4: would have to take into account that it may be,
1:25:12
Speaker 4: you know, a dead end if you want to go
1:25:14
Speaker 4: anywhere else afterwards. It's become a reputational concern, I would think,
1:25:23
Speaker 4: for most of the serious news people who are working
1:25:25
Speaker 4: over there.
1:25:27
Speaker 2: I wanted to switch topics briefly to one of your
1:25:33
Speaker 2: many other areas of expertise, but that is the Koch brothers.
1:25:37
Speaker 2: You wrote what I think is one of the most
1:25:39
Speaker 2: important books written about politics in a very long time
1:25:42
Speaker 2: called Dark Money, where you chronicle how conservative money, primarily
1:25:47
Speaker 2: from the Koch brothers, has influenced politics. I was wondering
1:25:50
Speaker 2: if you had a view on how the Kochs are
1:25:55
Speaker 2: adjusting to life in the Trump era, given that they
1:25:58
Speaker 2: were ambivalent, if not opposed, to the idea of Trump
1:26:02
Speaker 2: as president in 2016?
1:26:05
Speaker 4: Well, for one thing, we always talk about the Koch brothers.
1:26:08
Speaker 4: There's really only one Koch brother who's really active anymore,
1:26:12
Speaker 4: and that's Charles Koch, because David Koch has kind of
1:26:15
Speaker 4: retired from the arena. He's kind of in failing health.
1:26:20
Speaker 4: And So we're talking about Charles Koch. And, you know,
1:26:26
Speaker 4: in some ways he's made a Faustian bargain with the
1:26:29
Speaker 4: Trump administration. He may not like their policies on immigration,
1:26:35
Speaker 4: and he's anti-big government in any way, so he probably
1:26:38
Speaker 4: doesn't like their military spending. But he loves what they're
1:26:44
Speaker 4: doing on taxes and the environment. And so his people
1:26:50
Speaker 4: actually people who've worked with the Kochs over the years
1:26:53
Speaker 4: and in their sort of political organizations are all over
1:26:57
Speaker 4: the Trump administration, including Vice President Pence and including many
1:27:02
Speaker 4: other people in all of the key departments that have
1:27:06
Speaker 4: to do with the business that Koch has, particularly energy
1:27:09
Speaker 4: and the environment.
1:27:11
Speaker 2: And is it, do you expect that they would play
1:27:13
Speaker 2: a significant role in the 2020 election?
1:27:16
Speaker 4: At this point, The Kochs have an unparalleled private political
1:27:21
Speaker 4: machine in this country. It's a conservative machine, and it
1:27:26
Speaker 4: will play a role no matter what. If it doesn't
1:27:30
Speaker 4: necessarily get behind Trump in a big way, it will
1:27:33
Speaker 4: get behind Senate races, House races, all the way down
1:27:37
Speaker 4: to school board races. It has nodes all across the country.
1:27:41
Speaker 4: It has an almost unlimited amount of money, and it
1:27:44
Speaker 4: has a very strong agenda. which is to weaken the
1:27:49
Speaker 4: government and weaken regulations and lower taxes and make sure
1:27:55
Speaker 4: that the government does nothing to stop climate change. They
1:28:02
Speaker 4: want to make sure that the country continues to use
1:28:06
Speaker 4: fossil fuels, which they sell, and they want to make
1:28:10
Speaker 4: sure that there's no carbon tax. And they will continue
1:28:14
Speaker 4: to exert... all kinds of pressure to make sure that
1:28:18
Speaker 4: that agenda is served.
1:28:20
Speaker 2: So in other words, even if they don't explicitly support Trump,
1:28:23
Speaker 2: their efforts will aid Trump in his re-election, most likely.
1:28:27
Speaker 4: Well, you know, I don't expect them to ever get
1:28:31
Speaker 4: behind a Democrat. They always say maybe they will, but
1:28:34
Speaker 4: they never do. They actually, you know, they've one or
1:28:37
Speaker 4: two Democrats over the years that they've supported in states
1:28:39
Speaker 4: where they've got business interests, and they have to. But basically,
1:28:44
Speaker 4: it's a ruse whenever they say, oh, we're going to
1:28:47
Speaker 4: take our money away from the Republicans. They always support
1:28:50
Speaker 4: the most conservative candidates they can find.
1:28:53
Speaker 2: Jane, thank you so much for joining us. This is
1:28:56
Speaker 2: a fascinating and Somewhat disturbing conversation. And we will be
1:29:01
Speaker 2: tracking both Fox News and the Koch brothers throughout this election.
1:29:03
Speaker 2: So we'd love to have you back on as this
1:29:05
Speaker 2: election unfolds.
1:29:07
Speaker 4: Well, thanks, Dan. All right.
1:29:12
Speaker 1: Thanks to Jan Meir for joining us today. And we'll
1:29:15
Speaker 1: talk to you next week.
1:29:16
Speaker 3: Bye, everyone.
1:29:16
Speaker 2: Bye. Pod Save America is a product of Crooked Media.
1:29:23
Speaker 2: The show is produced by Michael Martinez.
1:29:25
Speaker 3: It's mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick.
1:29:27
Speaker 2: Kyle Seglin is our sound engineer. Thanks to Caroline Reston,
1:29:31
Speaker 2: Tanya Somanator, and Katie Long for production support, and to
1:29:33
Speaker 2: our digital team, Elijah Cohn, Nar Melkonian, and Milo Kim,
1:29:37
Speaker 2: who film and upload these bad boys every week.