Latest / Pod Save America / “Stimulus checks and balances.”

Transcript

“Stimulus checks and balances.” · 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: On today's pod, we'll talk about the pandemic relief bill
• 0:25
  Speaker 1: that may finally pass Congress. And we'll also do a
• 0:28
  Speaker 1: deep dive on why Democrats came up short in what
• 0:30
  Speaker 1: looks like a very winnable Senate race in Maine. After that,
• 0:36
  Speaker 1: a special treat. You'll hear a portion of the fascinating
• 0:38
  Speaker 1: conversation that Tommy and Ben had with Barack Obama on
• 0:42
  Speaker 1: this week's Pod Save the World, or as Barack Obama
• 0:45
  Speaker 1: calls it, Podcast the World. including a discussion about Obama's
• 0:49
  Speaker 1: tensions with the Pentagon over Afghanistan and his thoughts about
• 0:52
  Speaker 1: the rise of right-wing nationalism. It is an outstanding conversation.
• 0:57
  Speaker 1: I highly recommend you check it out if you haven't already.
• 1:01
  Speaker 2: He's loose.
• 1:01
  Speaker 1: The boss is loose.
• 1:03
  Speaker 2: You know, we watched it on YouTube. You're welcome, Elijah.
• 1:07
  Speaker 2: Because in my house, we've smashed that subscribe button. And
• 1:12
  Speaker 2: my takeaway from watching that interview was the gap between
• 1:17
  Speaker 2: how Barack Obama talked to us in private, like in
• 1:20
  Speaker 2: a meeting, and how he talks in public is dramatically
• 1:23
  Speaker 2: narrowed in the book phase of his life, which I
• 1:26
  Speaker 2: think is great.
• 1:27
  Speaker 1: So before we start, we have a brand new podcast
• 1:30
  Speaker 1: to tell you about. It's called Gaining Ground, The New Georgia.
• 1:34
  Speaker 1: We will be releasing this in collaboration with Tenderfoot TV.
• 1:37
  Speaker 1: It's hosted by Atlanta natives Jewel Wicker and Rembrandt Brown.
• 1:41
  Speaker 1: And it tells the story of the massively important Georgia runoff,
• 1:44
  Speaker 1: as well as the struggles and triumphs that led to
• 1:47
  Speaker 1: this moment. You'll hear from the organizers, strategists, and voters
• 1:50
  Speaker 1: on the ground in Georgia, hoping to change the South forever.
• 1:54
  Speaker 1: The trailer and episode one are out right now. So
• 1:58
  Speaker 1: go check it out. Subscribe to Gaining Ground, the new Georgia,
• 2:01
  Speaker 1: wherever you get your podcasts. Exciting stuff. Also, check out
• 2:05
  Speaker 1: a very special episode of Unholier Than Thou tomorrow, where
• 2:08
  Speaker 1: Phil will be joined by friend of the pod, Brittany
• 2:10
  Speaker 1: Pack McCunningham. With Christmas fast approaching, Phil and Brittany will
• 2:15
  Speaker 1: talk about the idea of Jesus Christ in the modern
• 2:17
  Speaker 1: context as a social justice warrior. So check it out.
• 2:21
  Speaker 1: It's out tomorrow. Make sure to subscribe to Unholier Than
• 2:24
  Speaker 1: Thou wherever you get your podcasts. All right, let's get
• 2:29
  Speaker 1: to the news. We just may have a deal on
• 2:32
  Speaker 1: a second coronavirus relief bill, a $ 900 billion package that
• 2:36
  Speaker 1: includes about $ 300 billion for small businesses, $ 25 billion in
• 2:40
  Speaker 1: rental assistance, a few billion for vaccine distribution, tens of
• 2:43
  Speaker 1: billions for schools and transportation systems, and an extra $ 300
• 2:47
  Speaker 1: per week in unemployment benefits. The corporate liability shield is gone,
• 2:53
  Speaker 1: but so is the $ 160 billion for state and local governments. Instead,
• 2:57
  Speaker 1: there will be an additional round of direct payments. of
• 3:01
  Speaker 1: around $ 600 per person. Dan, what do you think?
• 3:07
  Speaker 2: Better than nothing?
• 3:09
  Speaker 1: Better than nothing. That's what we got. It is better
• 3:12
  Speaker 1: than nothing.
• 3:14
  Speaker 2: I think it is. I mean, we said this, we've
• 3:17
  Speaker 2: been talking about this for a long time because it's
• 3:18
  Speaker 2: been on the cusp of happening for a long time.
• 3:20
  Speaker 2: And our take the whole time has been, this is
• 3:23
  Speaker 2: not a half a loaf. It's not a quarter loaf.
• 3:24
  Speaker 2: It is a fraction of what the country needs at
• 3:27
  Speaker 2: this time. We saw another 900,000 people this morning apply
• 3:30
  Speaker 2: for unemployment insurance. So the problem is getting worse. I
• 3:36
  Speaker 2: saw a report that if this were not passed and
• 3:40
  Speaker 2: unemployment were not extended, 5 million more Americans would fall
• 3:43
  Speaker 2: into poverty at the end of this month. And so
• 3:45
  Speaker 2: that at least speaks to the urgency of doing something,
• 3:49
  Speaker 2: even if it is far from what we would do
• 3:51
  Speaker 2: in a world in which Mitch McConnell did not have
• 3:54
  Speaker 2: the ability to control what happens in a large part
• 3:56
  Speaker 2: of this country.
• 3:58
  Speaker 1: And again, 8 million people have fallen into poverty just
• 4:00
  Speaker 1: since the summer. As a lot of folks have pointed out,
• 4:05
  Speaker 1: it's already too late for a lot of people whose
• 4:08
  Speaker 1: benefits expire the day after Christmas, because even if we
• 4:11
  Speaker 1: pass this thing now, it's going to take a few weeks,
• 4:14
  Speaker 1: even a month or so for the unemployment programs in
• 4:17
  Speaker 1: the states to get up and running again it'll take
• 4:19
  Speaker 1: a while for those checks to go out so there's
• 4:21
  Speaker 1: already people who you know are going to lose some
• 4:24
  Speaker 1: benefits and they're a couple hundred dollars away from you
• 4:27
  Speaker 1: know being laid on rent or a mortgage or being
• 4:30
  Speaker 1: able to pay their bills and um could fall into
• 4:33
  Speaker 1: poverty so it is a very dire situation and something
• 4:36
  Speaker 1: has to get passed as fast as possible even though
• 4:38
  Speaker 1: as you say this is woefully insufficient um Bernie Sanders,
• 4:43
  Speaker 1: still not a fan. Here's what he told the Washington
• 4:46
  Speaker 1: Post about a disagreement he had with Joe Manchin over
• 4:48
  Speaker 1: the compromise on a Democratic caucus conference call. Quote, when
• 4:53
  Speaker 1: you had Mnookin talking about $ 1. 8 trillion in this large
• 4:58
  Speaker 1: heroes bill, which is about $ 2. 2 trillion, I don't know
• 5:01
  Speaker 1: how Democrats started accepting a framework of only $ 900 billion.
• 5:06
  Speaker 1: So do you think we could have gotten a better deal, Dan?
• 5:13
  Speaker 2: I don't know. I'm not sure we could because the
• 5:16
  Speaker 2: period of time which Bernie Sanders was talking about was
• 5:19
  Speaker 2: before the election. And at that point in time, Trump
• 5:23
  Speaker 2: kind of sort of said he wanted a deal. Mnuchin
• 5:25
  Speaker 2: wanted a deal. But as we know, Mnuchin has basically
• 5:27
  Speaker 2: no juice. Mitch McConnell said no, said no to everything,
• 5:32
  Speaker 2: no to any potential compromise. And so I don't know
• 5:35
  Speaker 2: what situation could have put in place that would have
• 5:37
  Speaker 2: changed McConnell's political calculus. Um, It's hard to say something
• 5:42
  Speaker 2: could never possibly happen, but no one has ever articulated
• 5:45
  Speaker 2: to me the path that got us to something better.
• 5:51
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I kind of think the same thing. I mean,
• 5:52
  Speaker 1: when you're– a lot of people keep talking about the
• 5:56
  Speaker 1: White House deal was higher, the White House deal was higher. Right,
• 5:59
  Speaker 1: but it doesn't pass without McConnell in the Senate. McConnell
• 6:02
  Speaker 1: was stuck at $ 500 billion for a long time and
• 6:05
  Speaker 1: didn't want to budge off $ 500 billion. And presumably McConnell
• 6:08
  Speaker 1: didn't want to budge off 500 billion because he didn't
• 6:10
  Speaker 1: have the votes in his caucus to go beyond 500 billion.
• 6:14
  Speaker 1: Or at least he certainly didn't want to divide the
• 6:16
  Speaker 1: Republican caucus. So either way, it was going to be
• 6:18
  Speaker 1: dead on arrival in the Senate if it was over that.
• 6:20
  Speaker 1: So all this talk about, well, the White House was
• 6:22
  Speaker 1: going to give 1.2 trillion and all this kind of stuff. Yeah,
• 6:25
  Speaker 1: that's all fantasy until Mitch McConnell says yes to that. Now, look,
• 6:31
  Speaker 1: there were no direct payments in the original bipartisan compromise deal.
• 6:35
  Speaker 1: And now there are direct payments. And So why did
• 6:38
  Speaker 1: that happen? Well, Bernie Sanders in the Senate and a
• 6:42
  Speaker 1: lot of the progressive members of the House pushed really
• 6:44
  Speaker 1: hard for those direct payments. But it also wasn't because
• 6:49
  Speaker 1: Democrats alone pushed for direct payments. You had Josh Hawley
• 6:55
  Speaker 1: in the Senate working with Bernie Sanders to get these
• 6:58
  Speaker 1: direct payments into the bill. And then you got Mitch
• 7:03
  Speaker 1: McConnell on board with the direct payments.
• 7:05
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 7:06
  Speaker 1: So, uh, as our, as our what a day newsletter
• 7:09
  Speaker 1: noted last night, Senate humanitarian leader, Mitch McConnell came around
• 7:13
  Speaker 1: to the idea of including stimulus checks after witnessing the
• 7:15
  Speaker 1: plight of America's most vulnerable population, rich Republican senators from Georgia.
• 7:21
  Speaker 1: McConnell explicitly linked the direct payments to the Georgia runoffs
• 7:24
  Speaker 1: on a call with Republican senators saying, quote, Kelly and
• 7:27
  Speaker 1: David are getting hammered because they've been fighting against direct
• 7:31
  Speaker 1: payments for months. Um, Sure seems like Mitch and the
• 7:34
  Speaker 1: Republicans think their months-long blockade of any additional pandemic relief
• 7:39
  Speaker 1: could cause them the Senate, doesn't it?
• 7:41
  Speaker 2: I mean, he said as much. And it is one
• 7:44
  Speaker 2: of the most revealing comments that, as is always true
• 7:48
  Speaker 2: with Republicans, things are shocking but not surprising. And the
• 7:52
  Speaker 2: sole motivating factor for Republicans is electing other Republicans. And
• 7:57
  Speaker 2: if Mitch McConnell thought blocking aid making sure that 5
• 8:02
  Speaker 2: million Americans fell into poverty would help Kelly and David
• 8:06
  Speaker 2: return to the Senate, Mitch McConnell keep the gavel, and
• 8:08
  Speaker 2: he would sure as hell do that. I do want
• 8:10
  Speaker 2: to go back to one thing really fast, though, that
• 8:14
  Speaker 2: I think that McConnell's comment does bring up, which is
• 8:19
  Speaker 2: it is possible when you say, was there a way
• 8:21
  Speaker 2: to get another deal? There could have been a world
• 8:26
  Speaker 2: in which there was a House Democrats– Trump deal. This
• 8:30
  Speaker 2: is a very hypothetical situation where it was passed and
• 8:33
  Speaker 2: then forced McConnell to vote it up or down. And
• 8:37
  Speaker 2: that could have done one of two things. It could
• 8:39
  Speaker 2: have gotten you a deal. And we can speculate about
• 8:42
  Speaker 2: the political consequences of what that deal would have had
• 8:44
  Speaker 2: at the presidential level. Or it could have put it
• 8:48
  Speaker 2: in a situation where more Republicans than Kelly and David
• 8:50
  Speaker 2: were in trouble because they just voted down a bipartisan
• 8:54
  Speaker 2: relief deal. That is the hindsight is 2020 potential scenario.
• 8:59
  Speaker 1: Why do you think that Pelosi just didn't negotiate directly
• 9:02
  Speaker 1: with Mnuchin then on something like that?
• 9:04
  Speaker 2: I think– I don't know. I mean I don't want
• 9:07
  Speaker 2: to– it's hard to– the reporting on it is not
• 9:09
  Speaker 2: completely clear. It's hard to speculate. There's probably a sense
• 9:13
  Speaker 2: that Mnuchin cannot deliver a deal. Trump is too distracted
• 9:17
  Speaker 2: and dumb to actually be behind a deal. And therefore
• 9:20
  Speaker 2: now you're just giving the Republicans the patina of bipartisan
• 9:25
  Speaker 2: compromise without ever actually– delivering what you want to deliver.
• 9:29
  Speaker 2: I think that would be the argument against it.
• 9:32
  Speaker 1: I am fascinated by the fact that McConnell seems incredibly
• 9:38
  Speaker 1: worried about Loeffler and Purdue's position in Georgia, particularly over
• 9:45
  Speaker 1: the direct payments and over blocking relief. Because I had
• 9:51
  Speaker 1: always suspected that this could be a big issue in
• 9:54
  Speaker 1: the Georgia runoffs. And Sure enough, you know, Ossoff. and
• 10:00
  Speaker 1: Warnock are both running ads that hammer Purdue and Leffler,
• 10:06
  Speaker 1: as McConnell said, over a lack of direct payments and
• 10:10
  Speaker 1: over blocking COVID relief in general. And that makes me
• 10:14
  Speaker 1: think alone that maybe we could have gotten a better
• 10:18
  Speaker 1: deal by hammering the shit out of Senate Republicans and
• 10:22
  Speaker 1: particularly Kelly and David for blocking relief for Georgians during
• 10:26
  Speaker 1: a pandemic and a recession.
• 10:28
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 10:28
  Speaker 2: I think that, I mean, it is, I mean, all
• 10:30
  Speaker 2: of these are counterfactuals, but I, I agree with your premise.
• 10:34
  Speaker 1: Here's the tough part that we always wrestle with is the,
• 10:39
  Speaker 1: They are hostage takers in the Republican Party and they
• 10:41
  Speaker 1: are fine with a result where people don't get any
• 10:44
  Speaker 1: relief and that they just play chicken with Democrats. And
• 10:47
  Speaker 1: at the end of the day, there's no deal and
• 10:48
  Speaker 1: no one gets extension of unemployment benefits and no one
• 10:51
  Speaker 1: gets relief. Republicans don't really give a shit. We do.
• 10:55
  Speaker 1: So the consequence of, you know, pushing for a better
• 11:00
  Speaker 1: deal because we think that Republicans would accept a better
• 11:05
  Speaker 1: deal because they're worried about Georgia is and then Republicans saying,
• 11:08
  Speaker 1: you know what, fuck you, no deal, is millions and
• 11:12
  Speaker 1: millions of people hurting and falling into poverty. And so
• 11:17
  Speaker 1: there's real world consequences to playing the game of chicken
• 11:20
  Speaker 1: with Republicans in this that we care about and they
• 11:24
  Speaker 1: don't necessarily care about, which gives them an advantage in negotiations.
• 11:28
  Speaker 1: I don't hear that as much from people, but that
• 11:30
  Speaker 1: seems to be the truth.
• 11:32
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I mean, this is why... Democrats always get criticized
• 11:36
  Speaker 2: for not getting the best deal possible because we do
• 11:39
  Speaker 2: not want the hostage to be shot. And the Republicans
• 11:42
  Speaker 2: are willing to shoot the hostage in these legislative negotiations.
• 11:45
  Speaker 2: And it is a dangerous game of chicken to play
• 11:49
  Speaker 2: with 5 million people falling into poverty in two weeks.
• 11:53
  Speaker 2: Like that is what we are talking about here. And
• 11:55
  Speaker 2: so that limits your leverage. If you're not willing to
• 12:00
  Speaker 2: see people get hurt, then you're always going to be
• 12:04
  Speaker 2: at a slight disadvantage of these. And I don't have
• 12:06
  Speaker 2: a solution to that problem in situations like this, because
• 12:09
  Speaker 2: we would have to be people that we are not to,
• 12:12
  Speaker 2: as a party, and our leaders would have to be
• 12:15
  Speaker 2: people they are not, to be as impractical and as
• 12:19
  Speaker 2: cynical and as dangerous as the Republicans are in this situation.
• 12:23
  Speaker 1: And again, in terms of what it means for the
• 12:25
  Speaker 1: health of the economy and for the millions and millions
• 12:30
  Speaker 1: of Americans who are struggling and falling into poverty, it
• 12:35
  Speaker 1: is better to get a smaller deal now than a
• 12:37
  Speaker 1: bigger deal later. Because if you lose your benefits now
• 12:42
  Speaker 1: and fall into poverty and have less money to spend
• 12:44
  Speaker 1: in the economy, the economy gets worse, then more people
• 12:47
  Speaker 1: lose their jobs and more people fall into poverty, like
• 12:49
  Speaker 1: it becomes a vicious cycle. And so time is of
• 12:52
  Speaker 1: the essence in terms of breaking that cycle with some relief.
• 12:57
  Speaker 1: just to the people who said, well, if we don't
• 12:59
  Speaker 1: get the deal now, we can hope to win Georgia
• 13:01
  Speaker 1: and then get a bigger deal when Joe Biden becomes
• 13:03
  Speaker 1: president in late January and February. Well, then how many
• 13:05
  Speaker 1: more million people fall into poverty by then? It's a
• 13:08
  Speaker 1: real cost and it's a real consequence.
• 13:10
  Speaker 2: Well, it's also our leverage point is the Georgia elections
• 13:12
  Speaker 2: to the extent we have one. And so what happens
• 13:15
  Speaker 2: come January 6th and you're like, hey, Mitch McConnell, we
• 13:19
  Speaker 2: want to do another deal or now let's do something else.
• 13:23
  Speaker 2: And he does not care because Kelly and David are
• 13:26
  Speaker 2: either off on their yachts or back in the Senate.
• 13:30
  Speaker 1: So if Loeffler and Perdue are able to tell voters
• 13:36
  Speaker 1: that they just voted for a bipartisan compromise to deliver
• 13:40
  Speaker 1: relief to Georgians, could that cost Democrats the Senate?
• 13:45
  Speaker 2: Yeah, it could.
• 13:46
  Speaker 1: Yeah. So a lot of people, to step back for
• 13:49
  Speaker 1: a second, a lot of people criticized Pelosi before the
• 13:53
  Speaker 1: election because For not taking a deal and perhaps not
• 13:56
  Speaker 1: taking a big deal.
• 13:57
  Speaker 2: I was one of those people.
• 13:59
  Speaker 1: And we just talked about one of the substantive reasons
• 14:01
  Speaker 1: that she may not have taken the deal is, well,
• 14:03
  Speaker 1: it was maybe a deal with the White House, but
• 14:05
  Speaker 1: McConnell didn't really want the deal. There was a political
• 14:08
  Speaker 1: reason that I had always been worried about, which is
• 14:12
  Speaker 1: if the election was closer than we thought it would be,
• 14:15
  Speaker 1: it was. And Donald Trump went into the election just
• 14:18
  Speaker 1: a few weeks out being able to say, look at me,
• 14:22
  Speaker 1: I just passed a bipartisan compromise that delivered more checks
• 14:26
  Speaker 1: and more relief to the American people. That might've been
• 14:29
  Speaker 1: enough to get Donald Trump over the top in a
• 14:31
  Speaker 1: close election with swing voters. I kind of think now
• 14:35
  Speaker 1: it would have. Again, counterfactual, so no idea, no idea,
• 14:40
  Speaker 1: but I would not have wanted to make that bet
• 14:43
  Speaker 1: with the results the way they were.
• 14:44
  Speaker 2: Like you said, counterfactual. I was someone who made the
• 14:47
  Speaker 2: argument that for political and substantive reasons, Pelosi and Democrats
• 14:52
  Speaker 2: should at least pursue the deal as far as they
• 14:54
  Speaker 2: can do it. And the political reason we'll argue, I
• 14:59
  Speaker 2: could argue that if they had done the deal, we'd win.
• 15:02
  Speaker 2: You could argue if they had not done the deal,
• 15:04
  Speaker 2: we would lose. We don't know. Maybe you're probably more
• 15:07
  Speaker 2: right than I am on that. But on the substantive,
• 15:09
  Speaker 2: the argument was, even in a world in which we
• 15:13
  Speaker 2: win the Senate, the earliest we would get aid to
• 15:16
  Speaker 2: people would be next year, which is sort of what
• 15:19
  Speaker 2: we're looking at. We're going to be off by a week.
• 15:21
  Speaker 2: And millions of people have lost their jobs. They have
• 15:26
  Speaker 2: lost their savings. They may be in the process of
• 15:30
  Speaker 2: losing their homes in the time in which those negotiations
• 15:32
  Speaker 2: started and now. And that was the choice. I think
• 15:35
  Speaker 2: the end result here is that we'll never know. I
• 15:39
  Speaker 2: don't think– there was not an actual deal for Pelosi
• 15:42
  Speaker 2: to turn down, which is a very important thing to say.
• 15:44
  Speaker 2: It wasn't like They were like, sign on the dotted
• 15:47
  Speaker 2: line here, Nancy Pelosi, put it up for a vote,
• 15:49
  Speaker 2: and we're going to send checks to people. That wasn't
• 15:50
  Speaker 2: what happened. It was Steve Mnookin wanted to have a
• 15:54
  Speaker 2: bunch of meetings with no actual ability to deliver something.
• 15:57
  Speaker 2: And so she made a judgment based on that, which
• 16:00
  Speaker 2: is different than what we were accusing McConnell of potentially doing,
• 16:03
  Speaker 2: which is cynically not helping people to win elections. That
• 16:08
  Speaker 2: is not what Pelosi did.
• 16:09
  Speaker 1: I imagine what Pelosi's calculations were. And again, I can't
• 16:13
  Speaker 1: get inside Pelosi's head, but it was she understood what
• 16:16
  Speaker 1: the political consequences of passing a deal may be. She
• 16:19
  Speaker 1: also genuinely wanted to pass relief to help Americans. If
• 16:24
  Speaker 1: it looked like the chances that she was actually going
• 16:26
  Speaker 1: to get a deal, meaning not just from the White House,
• 16:29
  Speaker 1: but from the Senate, if it looked like the chances
• 16:31
  Speaker 1: were really high, she would have gone forward. Damn the
• 16:34
  Speaker 1: political consequences. But if it didn't look like the chances
• 16:37
  Speaker 1: were that high, does she really want to risk the
• 16:40
  Speaker 1: political consequences of pushing really hard for something that's not
• 16:44
  Speaker 1: as good as she might get after the election? So
• 16:46
  Speaker 1: it was not, again, none of these, I think the
• 16:48
  Speaker 1: important thing is there's just a lot of punditry on Pelosi, on,
• 16:54
  Speaker 1: you know, what the left is asking for. And like
• 16:56
  Speaker 1: all of these decisions are very difficult. They are not easy,
• 17:00
  Speaker 1: both the substance and the politics of them. And again, Also,
• 17:04
  Speaker 1: it's not clear what the consequences are going to be
• 17:07
  Speaker 1: all the time. Like we can't predict the future on
• 17:10
  Speaker 1: this stuff. So people are trying to operate with the
• 17:12
  Speaker 1: best information they have. That said, so we pass a
• 17:17
  Speaker 1: deal now and we do it because substantively we really
• 17:24
  Speaker 1: want people to get help. Even though politically it may
• 17:27
  Speaker 1: have helped us more to not have a deal and
• 17:29
  Speaker 1: then hammer Kelly and David over this.
• 17:31
  Speaker 2: In the short term, yes.
• 17:33
  Speaker 1: In the short term. So how should Ossoff and Warnock
• 17:36
  Speaker 1: talk about the bill in a way that prevents Loeffler
• 17:38
  Speaker 1: and Perdue from using it to their advantage? How do
• 17:42
  Speaker 1: they make do of the situation?
• 17:44
  Speaker 2: I think the best way to do it is to
• 17:49
  Speaker 2: make the case for, were it not for Kelly and
• 17:53
  Speaker 2: David and Republican control of the Senate, you would have
• 17:55
  Speaker 2: gotten $ 1, 200 in this check. Unemployment would have been this.
• 17:59
  Speaker 2: The state of Georgia would have gotten more money to
• 18:01
  Speaker 2: distribute vaccines to That is because of these corrupt, wealthy
• 18:07
  Speaker 2: Republicans looking out for their donors. Georgians are denied a
• 18:11
  Speaker 2: bunch of economic help. You're going to get the vaccine slower.
• 18:15
  Speaker 2: It's not like we're once again in the world of
• 18:17
  Speaker 2: making a counterfactual argument, but you can blame them on
• 18:21
  Speaker 2: the fact that this is something, but it's far from enough.
• 18:23
  Speaker 2: And the reason it's not enough is Kelly and David.
• 18:26
  Speaker 1: I would fucking light this deal on fire if I
• 18:29
  Speaker 1: was John Ossoff and Raphael Warnock. I would say it's shit.
• 18:33
  Speaker 1: I would. I would say and I would also attach motive,
• 18:37
  Speaker 1: cynical motive to the Republicans for doing this to Loeffler
• 18:40
  Speaker 1: and Perdue. And you were talking about a loaf or
• 18:42
  Speaker 1: half a loaf. I would say they threw you some
• 18:44
  Speaker 1: crumbs because they are afraid you'll vote them out. And
• 18:48
  Speaker 1: if you don't vote them out, you won't be getting
• 18:49
  Speaker 1: any more. That's what they've promised. They just they are
• 18:54
  Speaker 1: they are running scared. They wanted to give you a
• 18:56
  Speaker 1: few bucks. How much is $ 500 going to do for
• 19:00
  Speaker 1: your family? How much is cutting unemployment benefits in half
• 19:03
  Speaker 1: going to do for your family, which is what they
• 19:04
  Speaker 1: did in this deal? Cut unemployment benefits in half and
• 19:07
  Speaker 1: cut your checks in half from last time because they're
• 19:11
  Speaker 1: worried that you're going to vote them out. And if
• 19:13
  Speaker 1: you don't, you won't see another dime no matter how
• 19:16
  Speaker 1: bad this recession gets, and you won't see any more
• 19:18
  Speaker 1: help for the vaccine or for stopping COVID. That's what
• 19:22
  Speaker 1: they've promised. That's what they want to do. You know,
• 19:24
  Speaker 1: like I would be much more on the side of
• 19:26
  Speaker 1: this is not this is not great. And look what
• 19:29
  Speaker 1: Washington did.
• 19:31
  Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that is probably the best play. And
• 19:33
  Speaker 2: I think your your whole crumbs bread thing would lend
• 19:38
  Speaker 2: itself to a lot of really good digital.
• 19:39
  Speaker 1: A lot of different metaphors. We can pay. Yeah, we
• 19:41
  Speaker 1: can do carbs. We can do other stuff, whatever. Yeah,
• 19:44
  Speaker 1: that's right.
• 19:45
  Speaker 2: Um, this isn't necessarily, I think an argument that's going
• 19:49
  Speaker 2: to win you a runoff in Georgia, but just stepping
• 19:53
  Speaker 2: back for a minute, the entire conversation we're having here
• 19:55
  Speaker 2: is such an argument for why we need control the Senate.
• 19:56
  Speaker 2: Cause what a stupid fucking situation we are in that
• 20:00
  Speaker 2: we are arguing between nothing and barely enough in the
• 20:04
  Speaker 2: middle of a raging pandemic that And in a recession,
• 20:09
  Speaker 2: it is insane that this is the approach to it.
• 20:12
  Speaker 1: But you know what? Like that, that anger that you
• 20:15
  Speaker 1: just expressed is you're right. Like you have to tailor
• 20:19
  Speaker 1: it for Georgia and not make it about process and
• 20:21
  Speaker 1: Mitch and Trump and all the rest of it. But that,
• 20:23
  Speaker 1: that anger is what Ossoff, Warnock and Democrats in general
• 20:28
  Speaker 1: should be channeling. Hey, you know, and Bernie's been doing this, right?
• 20:31
  Speaker 1: Like you see when, when, and, and I think Bernie
• 20:35
  Speaker 1: has said he doesn't like the deal. Um, And, you know,
• 20:38
  Speaker 1: you may think, well, OK, if would Bernie really vote
• 20:41
  Speaker 1: against the deal if it meant that no relief was
• 20:43
  Speaker 1: going to anyone? I don't know if he would. I
• 20:45
  Speaker 1: think Bernie cares that relief gets to people, even if
• 20:47
  Speaker 1: it's not enough. But every interview he gives about this,
• 20:50
  Speaker 1: he's pretty angry, you know, and like he should be
• 20:54
  Speaker 1: angry because people are really hurting right now for no
• 20:57
  Speaker 1: fault of their own. Because we're in the middle of
• 21:00
  Speaker 1: a pandemic and the Republicans have held up relief for
• 21:03
  Speaker 1: months because they don't fucking give a shit. And we
• 21:07
  Speaker 1: should be angry about that. And we should say, if
• 21:09
  Speaker 1: you want that to change, you got to vote. That's it,
• 21:13
  Speaker 1: or else it's never going to change.
• 21:14
  Speaker 2: The other point I think that Warnock, Ossoff, and Democrats
• 21:18
  Speaker 2: can make here is the fact that the Republicans insisted
• 21:21
  Speaker 2: taking out money that would have gone to preserve the
• 21:24
  Speaker 2: jobs of teachers, cops, firefighters. That's the state and local money.
• 21:29
  Speaker 2: And Too often in shorthand, we call it funding for
• 21:31
  Speaker 2: states and cities or states and localities.
• 21:33
  Speaker 1: No one knows what that is. I mean, no one
• 21:35
  Speaker 1: really gets what that is. It's not humanized in any way.
• 21:38
  Speaker 3: Yes.
• 21:38
  Speaker 2: And this is something we're going to have to deal
• 21:41
  Speaker 2: with next year because these states are in a situation,
• 21:43
  Speaker 2: unlike the federal government, where they cannot run a deficit
• 21:45
  Speaker 2: or are going to have to make dramatic cuts. We
• 21:47
  Speaker 2: saw this in 2009, back when there actually was a
• 21:51
  Speaker 2: decent amount of state and local money for cops, firefighters,
• 21:54
  Speaker 2: and teachers in the Recovery Act. But we're going to
• 21:59
  Speaker 2: have to rebrand this in a way that puts real
• 22:01
  Speaker 2: pressure on Republicans because what Brian Kemp is doing, what
• 22:03
  Speaker 2: Ron DeSantis is doing, what these Republican governors all in
• 22:06
  Speaker 2: the country are doing is they are opposing something that
• 22:10
  Speaker 2: would keep people, essential workers in their states, on the job.
• 22:17
  Speaker 2: Even in the world of blue state bailouts and Fox
• 22:19
  Speaker 2: News and everything else, laying off teachers, firefighters, cops, EMTs–
• 22:27
  Speaker 2: is not popular and you can make Republicans pay a
• 22:29
  Speaker 2: price for it. You just got to do it aggressively.
• 22:31
  Speaker 2: And that is something that I think could happen here
• 22:33
  Speaker 2: that they could do in the Georgia race in these
• 22:34
  Speaker 2: coming weeks, if this deal is passed.
• 22:37
  Speaker 1: And I do think, you know, as Joe Biden takes
• 22:42
  Speaker 1: over and the Biden administration comes in, like, I think
• 22:45
  Speaker 1: that his, you know, his message of like, I think
• 22:48
  Speaker 1: I can get things done with Republicans. That should be
• 22:51
  Speaker 1: a means, not an end, right? Like bipartisanship, and unity
• 22:56
  Speaker 1: in Washington is not the goal here. And Democrats and
• 23:01
  Speaker 1: Biden can't lose sight of that. And I don't think
• 23:04
  Speaker 1: there's evidence they are yet. But this is an incredibly
• 23:08
  Speaker 1: dark time for the country, as Biden has said many times,
• 23:11
  Speaker 1: both because of the pandemic and the recession. And I
• 23:14
  Speaker 1: think the anger and the pain that people are feeling
• 23:18
  Speaker 1: needs to drive the message on behalf of Democrats that
• 23:22
  Speaker 1: we are there fighting for these people. That is the end.
• 23:27
  Speaker 1: However we get there depends, right? If we win the
• 23:30
  Speaker 1: two Senate seats in Georgia, then we tell Mitch McConnell
• 23:33
  Speaker 1: to fuck off and we pass a bunch of stuff.
• 23:35
  Speaker 1: If we don't, then sometimes we may have to compromise
• 23:37
  Speaker 1: with Republicans. But again, it's all in service of helping
• 23:42
  Speaker 1: people who are struggling right now. And that I think
• 23:44
  Speaker 1: has to be the overarching message. And they have to
• 23:46
  Speaker 1: be able to channel that anger and that pain that's
• 23:49
  Speaker 1: in the country right now.
• 23:51
  Speaker 2: Joe Biden has, Because of his message and the coalition
• 23:54
  Speaker 2: he put together to win, he has a political obligation
• 23:56
  Speaker 2: to extend his hand to Republicans. If Mitch McConnell decides
• 24:01
  Speaker 2: to smack that hand away, that's on Mitch McConnell. Then
• 24:04
  Speaker 2: it's incumbent upon Joe Biden and all of us to
• 24:06
  Speaker 2: hold Republicans accountable for doing that. Joe Biden can get
• 24:10
  Speaker 2: caught trying with bipartisan, but if he succeeds, God bless him,
• 24:14
  Speaker 2: and that's a huge achievement. But if he tries and fails,
• 24:17
  Speaker 2: that is on Mitch McConnell. That is on the Republicans.
• 24:20
  Speaker 2: And we have the opportunity in 2022 to hold them
• 24:22
  Speaker 2: accountable for that decision.
• 24:24
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I agree. So we're going to try over the
• 24:35
  Speaker 1: next few months to do an occasional segment called What
• 24:39
  Speaker 1: the Hell Happened in 2020, where we dive into the
• 24:41
  Speaker 1: election results and figure out what they can tell us
• 24:43
  Speaker 1: about how to win next time. So today we're going
• 24:46
  Speaker 1: to kick it off with the Senate race in Maine.
• 24:49
  Speaker 1: where Susan Collins defeated Sarah Gideon in a contest where
• 24:52
  Speaker 1: Democrats had been favored for the entire campaign. Gideon led
• 24:56
  Speaker 1: every single poll. She was around five points ahead on
• 25:01
  Speaker 1: Election Day, but she ultimately lost to Collins by nearly
• 25:04
  Speaker 1: 9% after being five points ahead in the polls, even
• 25:10
  Speaker 1: as Joe Biden won the state of Maine by 9%.
• 25:13
  Speaker 1: Gideon lost by 9%. Joe Biden won by 9%, which,
• 25:16
  Speaker 1: by the way, was six points bigger than Hillary Clinton's
• 25:20
  Speaker 1: win in 2016. Democratic Congressman Jared Golden also won re-election
• 25:25
  Speaker 1: in Maine's conservative 2nd Congressional District, which Trump carried twice,
• 25:29
  Speaker 1: and Golden improved on his 2018 win by a few points.
• 25:34
  Speaker 1: Gideon's loss left Maine as the only state in the
• 25:37
  Speaker 1: country that didn't vote for a president and senator of
• 25:40
  Speaker 1: the same party.
• 25:41
  Speaker 3: Dan.
• 25:42
  Speaker 1: Dan. Sarah Gideon ran for office in a blue state
• 25:45
  Speaker 1: where she outraised and outspent Susan Collins by so much
• 25:47
  Speaker 1: that she ended the campaign with $ 15 million in the bank.
• 25:51
  Speaker 1: What happened?
• 25:53
  Speaker 2: Well, in many cases, you would say that a candidate
• 25:56
  Speaker 2: who ended with $ 15 million in the bank should have
• 25:58
  Speaker 2: spent more money, but I don't think that's the case here.
• 26:00
  Speaker 2: She had more money than she possibly spent.
• 26:02
  Speaker 1: As much money as she possibly could. Both of us
• 26:05
  Speaker 1: were reading a lot about this in preparation to talk
• 26:08
  Speaker 1: about this and like, Every single piece talked about voters
• 26:13
  Speaker 1: who were so sick of seeing Gideon ads, Gideon flyers,
• 26:16
  Speaker 1: Gideon mail pieces, Gideon digital ads. She ran all the
• 26:20
  Speaker 1: ads she possibly could.
• 26:23
  Speaker 2: I read approximately 1,000 articles about this over the last
• 26:26
  Speaker 2: 36 hours. Me too. And there's definitely a– We're experts.
• 26:32
  Speaker 1: Ask us anything.
• 26:32
  Speaker 2: Yeah, that's right. That's right. Have I been to Maine
• 26:35
  Speaker 2: in six years? No. But have I read some tweets?
• 26:38
  Speaker 1: Yes, you have. You went to my wedding.
• 26:41
  Speaker 2: Oh yeah, that's right. That was in Maine, huh? You
• 26:43
  Speaker 2: know what?
• 26:43
  Speaker 1: I would have really bet. I got married there, man.
• 26:45
  Speaker 2: I really would have bet if you'd asked me, like,
• 26:48
  Speaker 2: I remember going to Maine for your wedding. I had
• 26:49
  Speaker 2: a delicious lobster roll on the way there and on
• 26:52
  Speaker 2: the way back. Um, but I kind of would have
• 26:55
  Speaker 2: guessed based on how 2020 has gone, you've been married
• 26:57
  Speaker 2: for like eight years. So that's true.
• 26:59
  Speaker 1: Yeah, no, it's only been a little over three years.
• 27:02
  Speaker 2: So Wow. That's really something. So yes, I have been
• 27:07
  Speaker 2: to Maine recently and I know people who have homes
• 27:10
  Speaker 2: in Maine, like your in-laws. So there we go.
• 27:13
  Speaker 1: There you go.
• 27:14
  Speaker 2: But I do think some of the articles and analysis
• 27:17
  Speaker 2: of this that have been written are written through the
• 27:19
  Speaker 2: perspective of Susan Collins' victory. You interview all these voters like,
• 27:23
  Speaker 2: I'm so sick of the Gideon ads. I'm so sick
• 27:25
  Speaker 2: of the Gideon fires. Well, guess what? Susan Collins and
• 27:28
  Speaker 2: the Republicans spent just as much as Sarah Gideon, right?
• 27:32
  Speaker 2: There were just as many Susan Collins ads. There was
• 27:35
  Speaker 2: just as much outside money on the Susan Collins side that,
• 27:42
  Speaker 2: and if Sarah Gideon had won, you probably would not
• 27:44
  Speaker 2: be interviewing a whole bunch of voters in Maine diners saying,
• 27:48
  Speaker 2: I'm so sick of the ads, right? Like, why didn't
• 27:49
  Speaker 2: you vote for Sarah Gideon? Because I saw some ads.
• 27:51
  Speaker 2: It just, I think, so there is always this bias
• 27:54
  Speaker 2: in coverage that is sort of reverse engineered from the results.
• 27:57
  Speaker 2: I do think there are a couple of things to
• 27:59
  Speaker 2: take away from this. And one big giant caveat. One
• 28:02
  Speaker 2: is there are some lessons to learn for other races,
• 28:08
  Speaker 2: but Maine seems to be a real anomaly in a
• 28:11
  Speaker 2: way that does not apply everywhere else. It is just
• 28:15
  Speaker 2: like there was a period of time in politics more
• 28:17
  Speaker 2: than a decade ago where you had lots of states
• 28:19
  Speaker 2: where the Republicans won at the presidential level and Democrats
• 28:23
  Speaker 2: had the Senate seats. I know this seems impossible to
• 28:25
  Speaker 2: imagine now. as recently as 2004, the Democrats had all
• 28:28
  Speaker 2: four seats in the Dakotas.
• 28:31
  Speaker 1: We had all four?
• 28:32
  Speaker 2: My God. Kent Conrad, Byron Dorgan, Tim Johnson, Tom Daschle.
• 28:37
  Speaker 2: I worked for two of those four men, yes.
• 28:39
  Speaker 1: I couldn't, I didn't even, for a long time, I
• 28:41
  Speaker 1: didn't even know that Kent Conrad and Byron Dorgan were
• 28:43
  Speaker 1: two different people.
• 28:46
  Speaker 2: We had both Senate seats in Arkansas, both Senate seats
• 28:49
  Speaker 2: in Louisiana, a Senate seat in Alaska. It's just, it's
• 28:51
  Speaker 2: a very different world where senators, there was a discount
• 28:54
  Speaker 2: between the presidential and Senate vote. That has not been
• 28:56
  Speaker 2: true for a very long time, and certainly was not
• 28:59
  Speaker 2: true anywhere else in this election, and that Maine seems
• 29:01
  Speaker 2: to be the one exception there. And I think that
• 29:03
  Speaker 2: there is a little bit of an anachronism in Maine
• 29:06
  Speaker 2: that may not be applicable in other places.
• 29:09
  Speaker 1: Well, and I don't necessarily just think it's Maine and
• 29:13
  Speaker 1: the electorate in Maine. A lot of this has to
• 29:15
  Speaker 1: do with Susan Collins, who, like, let's be honest, I mean,
• 29:19
  Speaker 1: I– Wanted to beat Susan Collins more than almost anyone else, right?
• 29:24
  Speaker 1: Because I think that she poses as a moderate, but
• 29:29
  Speaker 1: during the Trump era, she was not a moderate. And
• 29:31
  Speaker 1: she voted for Brett Kavanaugh, and she voted for Trump's
• 29:34
  Speaker 1: tax cuts, and she just did not speak up against
• 29:38
  Speaker 1: Trump almost ever. And I don't think she showed any
• 29:43
  Speaker 1: kind of political courage. That's my view. I am a
• 29:45
  Speaker 1: liberal who lives in Los Angeles. Okay. But like she
• 29:50
  Speaker 1: has a 24 year reputation as a moderate voice in
• 29:55
  Speaker 1: Maine to the people of Maine. Right. They looked at
• 29:58
  Speaker 1: her and said, okay, maybe they didn't agree with all
• 30:01
  Speaker 1: of her decisions. In fact, it seems like the electorate
• 30:03
  Speaker 1: in Maine did not, right? Like let's not forget in
• 30:06
  Speaker 1: her last election, she won with almost 70% of the vote.
• 30:10
  Speaker 1: She won with 51% of the vote here. So she
• 30:12
  Speaker 1: did lose a bunch of people who thought that she,
• 30:14
  Speaker 1: you know, strayed from her moderate, moderate past, but they
• 30:18
  Speaker 1: see her vote to save the affordable care act, which
• 30:21
  Speaker 1: she did. And then to bookend that vote, they saw
• 30:25
  Speaker 1: her vote against Amy Coney Barrett right before the election,
• 30:28
  Speaker 1: which she did. They saw her not fully embrace Donald Trump.
• 30:32
  Speaker 1: Was it politically courageous to like not come out one
• 30:35
  Speaker 1: way or the other to say if you supported Donald Trump? No,
• 30:38
  Speaker 1: it wasn't courageous at all. But people in Maine are like,
• 30:40
  Speaker 1: they knew what was going on. They're like, she doesn't
• 30:42
  Speaker 1: really like Trump. She's not saying it. Okay, that makes
• 30:45
  Speaker 1: me feel better. And so I'll go vote for Joe
• 30:47
  Speaker 1: Biden because I want him to be president. Then we
• 30:49
  Speaker 1: won't have Donald Trump. And then Susan Collins maybe can
• 30:52
  Speaker 1: go back to being a martyr itself. I mean, it
• 30:54
  Speaker 1: doesn't sound like a crazy thing if you're just a
• 30:57
  Speaker 1: regular voter in Maine, does it?
• 30:59
  Speaker 2: Seems crazy to me.
• 31:00
  Speaker 1: Seems crazy to me too. I'm a fucking liberal in
• 31:04
  Speaker 1: Los Angeles.
• 31:05
  Speaker 2: I mean, that is part of the problem. And so
• 31:07
  Speaker 2: I think there are a couple of different elements here.
• 31:09
  Speaker 2: There is one funny thing in these stories, which is
• 31:12
  Speaker 2: that a big part of the race was Susan Collins'
• 31:16
  Speaker 2: main roots versus this newcomer, Sarah Gideon. So I was like,
• 31:21
  Speaker 2: when did Sarah– is she a carpetbagger? Did she just–
• 31:24
  Speaker 2: buy a home in Chappaqua. 16 years.
• 31:26
  Speaker 1: 16 years she's lived there.
• 31:27
  Speaker 3: 16 years. Yes.
• 31:29
  Speaker 2: If she was born there, she'd be driving a car.
• 31:31
  Speaker 1: She's not someone that like Chuck Schumer shipped into Maine.
• 31:35
  Speaker 1: She was the speaker of the house in the Maine
• 31:37
  Speaker 1: state legislature. I mean, which is like, but again, like
• 31:41
  Speaker 1: it's your job on a campaign to both define your
• 31:44
  Speaker 1: opponent and define yourself and prevent yourself from being defined
• 31:47
  Speaker 1: by your opponent. And it is clear that Collins used
• 31:52
  Speaker 1: all of the outside money to that gideon was getting
• 31:55
  Speaker 1: which of course susan collins got a fuckload of outside
• 31:57
  Speaker 1: money too but collins used the outside money that gideon
• 32:00
  Speaker 1: was was was um getting to develop a narrative about
• 32:04
  Speaker 1: her that she was some liberal transplant um who was
• 32:09
  Speaker 1: you know placed there by outsiders and that she was
• 32:12
  Speaker 1: trying to take out our senator there's like which i
• 32:16
  Speaker 1: put in quotes because um this was like the sign
• 32:19
  Speaker 1: and part of the branding all over maine about susan
• 32:22
  Speaker 1: collins she was our senator And Sarah Gideon was other.
• 32:26
  Speaker 1: And Susan Collins was ours, which is probably a smart–
• 32:29
  Speaker 1: it's a smart narrative.
• 32:32
  Speaker 2: I mean the outside money thing is so ridiculous because
• 32:35
  Speaker 2: a large bulk of the money that Sarah Gideon raised
• 32:38
  Speaker 2: was– sure, it was out of state as it is
• 32:40
  Speaker 2: for every candidate everywhere, but it was grassroots money. Susan
• 32:44
  Speaker 2: Collins had more than $ 50 million in Republican super PAC
• 32:48
  Speaker 2: money spent on her behalf. Yeah. So it is an
• 32:52
  Speaker 2: absurd– I would say there's a couple of things here,
• 32:56
  Speaker 2: and I'll give another caveat here just as we sort
• 32:58
  Speaker 2: of– it is very hard in the Citizens United era
• 33:01
  Speaker 2: to judge and hold accountable a specific campaign for how
• 33:05
  Speaker 2: the campaign plays out. So Sarah Gideon spent $ 40 million
• 33:09
  Speaker 2: on her campaign, and some of those ads were good.
• 33:12
  Speaker 2: Some of them may not have been. It's an absurd
• 33:14
  Speaker 2: amount of money. But there were $ 50 million spent on
• 33:19
  Speaker 2: her behalf by other people, by outside groups that she
• 33:22
  Speaker 2: is legally prohibited to speak with. So you had $ 9
• 33:26
  Speaker 2: million spent in pro-Gideon ads. I imagine, although I haven't
• 33:31
  Speaker 2: looked at it, much of that is from the DSCC
• 33:33
  Speaker 2: and the Democratic Super PAC, Democratic Senate Super PAC. And
• 33:37
  Speaker 2: then you had $ 51 million spent in negative Susan Collins ads.
• 33:41
  Speaker 2: And one of the challenges here is none of those
• 33:44
  Speaker 2: groups are from Maine. They don't have any real sense
• 33:47
  Speaker 2: of Maine politics. They're often cases raising their money on
• 33:51
  Speaker 2: the internet. Their ads look a lot like the Lincoln
• 33:53
  Speaker 2: Project ads and they're not. And so it's very hard
• 33:57
  Speaker 2: to paint a coherent narrative when you have $ 50 million
• 34:03
  Speaker 2: in ads against Susan Collins that are sometimes reverse engineered
• 34:06
  Speaker 2: to raise money online. And that is one of the
• 34:08
  Speaker 2: problems with some of the messaging here is when you were,
• 34:11
  Speaker 2: as you pointed out, Susan Collins got 69% of the
• 34:14
  Speaker 2: vote six years ago. She got 60% in the six
• 34:17
  Speaker 2: years prior to that. So in order to win, Sarah
• 34:21
  Speaker 2: Giddey needed to convince a large number of people who
• 34:24
  Speaker 2: had previously voted for Susan Collins to do something different
• 34:27
  Speaker 2: this time. And when you were trying to run against
• 34:30
  Speaker 2: an incumbent who has been long supported in a state
• 34:34
  Speaker 2: You have to create a permission structure for people to
• 34:36
  Speaker 2: change their mind. And you can do that in two ways.
• 34:38
  Speaker 2: One is you can say that person has changed, or
• 34:44
  Speaker 2: you can say the context has changed. And what you
• 34:47
  Speaker 2: can't do is tell people that they were wrong for
• 34:51
  Speaker 2: their previous vote. So they were stupid to do that.
• 34:54
  Speaker 2: And the model on how to do this right is
• 34:56
  Speaker 2: a lot of the ways in which the Biden campaign
• 34:59
  Speaker 2: ran ads targeted towards people who supported Trump in 2016
• 35:04
  Speaker 2: and the way the Republican Voters Against Trump organization ran
• 35:08
  Speaker 2: ads with Trump people talking about how they– Trump voters
• 35:10
  Speaker 2: talking about how they changed their minds. What is not
• 35:12
  Speaker 2: the way to do it is just paint Susan Collins
• 35:15
  Speaker 2: as this corrupt Trump stooge because people who voted for
• 35:18
  Speaker 2: her before who have known her for this very long
• 35:20
  Speaker 2: time are never going to believe that.
• 35:22
  Speaker 1: This is my problem is we don't do subtlety well.
• 35:27
  Speaker 1: democrats sometimes in politics right like and you can and
• 35:31
  Speaker 1: this happens in campaigns and clearly republicans don't either they're
• 35:34
  Speaker 1: much worse about this but um there is like sometimes
• 35:38
  Speaker 1: you can lean into hyperbole too much right which is
• 35:40
  Speaker 1: like it is possible to say that susan collins for
• 35:43
  Speaker 1: a long time was an independent voice and she has
• 35:46
  Speaker 1: strayed right she has forgotten her main roots she has
• 35:50
  Speaker 1: gone washington right and she's stopped caring about us after
• 35:54
  Speaker 1: being around for so long And don't we want someone
• 35:56
  Speaker 1: to actually care about people in Maine? And she votes
• 35:59
  Speaker 1: with all these other Republicans and Donald Trump way too much.
• 36:01
  Speaker 1: And she never used to do that. And she's starting
• 36:04
  Speaker 1: to change. And I love Susan Collins. I voted for
• 36:07
  Speaker 1: her a lot. But you know what? I just don't
• 36:09
  Speaker 1: like her. I think she's forgotten us, right? Like run
• 36:12
  Speaker 1: ads like that. You could do that. Or you could
• 36:13
  Speaker 1: say she's fucking McConnell and Trump stooge, which like you said,
• 36:16
  Speaker 1: a lot of people are going to scratch their heads
• 36:17
  Speaker 1: and be like, is she? Because she doesn't seem like it.
• 36:20
  Speaker 1: She did vote to save the ACA. She did vote
• 36:22
  Speaker 1: against Amy Coney Barrett. So is she a stooge for
• 36:24
  Speaker 1: Trump and McConnell? Doesn't really make sense to me.
• 36:27
  Speaker 2: Yeah, the Amy Coney Barrett vote, in a race she
• 36:30
  Speaker 2: won by such a large margin, it's hard to say
• 36:32
  Speaker 2: that's the one reason why Sarah Gideon lost. But- If
• 36:39
  Speaker 2: the main reason that people had mobilized against her was
• 36:41
  Speaker 2: her vote for Brett Kavanaugh two years ago, and then
• 36:45
  Speaker 2: five days or whatever it was before the election, she
• 36:47
  Speaker 2: gets to do the exact opposite of that in a
• 36:50
  Speaker 2: high profile way and reaffirm her independent anti-Trump, if you will, credentials.
• 36:57
  Speaker 2: That's a very hard thing to overcome.
• 37:01
  Speaker 1: Yeah. The other, when you read a lot of these
• 37:05
  Speaker 1: pieces is people complain that Gideon Did not really define
• 37:09
  Speaker 1: herself ever that she was running against Collins, that her
• 37:15
  Speaker 1: ads were very negative about Collins, that it was all
• 37:17
  Speaker 1: about Collins and tying Collins to Trump and McConnell. And
• 37:22
  Speaker 1: that Gideon didn't really talk enough about herself and what
• 37:25
  Speaker 1: she stood for and the issues that she was going
• 37:27
  Speaker 1: to fight for. Now, again, this is like to your
• 37:30
  Speaker 1: first point. People sometimes look in the rearview mirror after
• 37:34
  Speaker 1: a campaign and, you know, the losing campaign has done
• 37:37
  Speaker 1: everything wrong and the winning campaign has done everything right.
• 37:40
  Speaker 1: So I don't know. I wasn't in Maine. I didn't
• 37:42
  Speaker 1: see all the Gideon ads. I didn't go to all
• 37:44
  Speaker 1: the Gideon speeches. So I'm not sure if that's all right.
• 37:47
  Speaker 1: But it seems to be that is the feeling that
• 37:50
  Speaker 1: you get from reading about the race that people think
• 37:52
  Speaker 1: that Gideon did not define herself. I don't know if
• 37:53
  Speaker 1: you have any thoughts on that.
• 37:55
  Speaker 2: Well... I've seen a bunch of Gideon ads because we
• 37:59
  Speaker 2: looked at a bunch of Senate race ads for Campaign
• 38:01
  Speaker 2: Experts React. Once again, this is the problem with operating
• 38:06
  Speaker 2: in the Citizens United environment, which is $ 50 million in
• 38:10
  Speaker 2: outside money spent in Maine to elect Sarah Gideon. Of
• 38:14
  Speaker 2: that 50, $ 41 million was negative Susan Collins attack ads.
• 38:19
  Speaker 2: So even if Sarah Gideon's ads were 70-30 positive or
• 38:22
  Speaker 2: 60-40 positive, An average voter, despite the stand-by-your-ad disclaimer rules,
• 38:29
  Speaker 2: does not distinguish between, did the Gideon campaign run this ad?
• 38:32
  Speaker 2: Did the Senate Majority Pack do it? Did the Lincoln Project?
• 38:34
  Speaker 2: Did this other grifting super PAC? And one of the
• 38:37
  Speaker 2: challenges is the first real sense of how you raise
• 38:42
  Speaker 2: money in the post-Trump era was against Susan Collins for
• 38:46
  Speaker 2: her vote against Brett Kavanaugh. That was when– or no,
• 38:50
  Speaker 2: it was actually– going back to the tax cut and
• 38:53
  Speaker 2: Susan Collins' vote to vote for that bill and eliminate
• 38:58
  Speaker 2: the eventual mandate, gutting portions of Obamacare, was when people
• 39:02
  Speaker 2: started raising huge amounts of monies into a generic fund
• 39:06
  Speaker 2: for whoever the nominee was going to be to run
• 39:08
  Speaker 2: against Collins. And there was huge incentive to raise and
• 39:11
  Speaker 2: spend money attacking Susan Collins. It was a way to
• 39:14
  Speaker 2: excite liberal donors, to excite grassroots donors. And so you
• 39:17
  Speaker 2: end up with all of this negative money. And it
• 39:20
  Speaker 2: Definitely swamped whatever positive message, whether it was sufficient or insufficient,
• 39:24
  Speaker 2: that Sarah Gideon had. Because you know what's really hard
• 39:27
  Speaker 2: to do is to get a bunch of people to
• 39:29
  Speaker 2: give $ 5. online to run ads talking about Sarah Gideon's
• 39:34
  Speaker 2: legislative record. What you can raise a lot of money
• 39:36
  Speaker 2: for is ads attacking Susan Collins. And I do think
• 39:39
  Speaker 2: as we– going forward as outside groups think about how
• 39:44
  Speaker 2: they can be most helpful in the 2022 race– We
• 39:48
  Speaker 2: have to really think about what the overall picture of
• 39:53
  Speaker 2: spending is, how much is positive, how much is negative.
• 39:55
  Speaker 2: And these groups have to think like you have a
• 39:58
  Speaker 2: little bit of a collective action problem where they can't
• 40:02
  Speaker 2: speak to each other. They can't speak to the candidate,
• 40:04
  Speaker 2: but they can look. They know what the ad traffic is.
• 40:06
  Speaker 2: They can look at it and make decisions about whether
• 40:09
  Speaker 2: they are being helpful or hurtful by running negative and
• 40:11
  Speaker 2: positive ads. And we're going to have to really think
• 40:13
  Speaker 2: about that.
• 40:15
  Speaker 1: And it's a tough decision because I don't think the
• 40:17
  Speaker 1: answer is no more negative ads, all positive ads, right?
• 40:21
  Speaker 1: There is a mix. We were just talking about how
• 40:24
  Speaker 1: we believe it will be politically useful in 2022 to
• 40:27
  Speaker 1: run against Mitch McConnell and the Republicans blocking, if they
• 40:32
  Speaker 1: do that, all of Joe Biden's agenda and the Democratic agenda.
• 40:36
  Speaker 1: But how much do you make the race about that
• 40:39
  Speaker 1: versus how much do you make the race about if you...
• 40:43
  Speaker 1: either return a Democratic majority to Congress or vote for
• 40:47
  Speaker 1: a Democratic Senate and flip the Senate, depending on what
• 40:49
  Speaker 1: happens in Georgia, these are the things that will happen, right?
• 40:53
  Speaker 1: This is the vision. These are the policies that Joe
• 40:56
  Speaker 1: Biden will be able to pass to make your life better. Like,
• 40:58
  Speaker 1: what is the balance of that?
• 41:00
  Speaker 2: And this is where you can, it is very, very
• 41:02
  Speaker 2: important to learn lessons from where we came up short
• 41:05
  Speaker 2: and also understanding that Ron Johnson, were he to run again,
• 41:09
  Speaker 2: is not Susan Collins.
• 41:11
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 41:12
  Speaker 2: Marco Rubio is not Susan Collins. Susan Collins is a
• 41:16
  Speaker 2: very unique figure in American politics.
• 41:19
  Speaker 1: Literally no one is like Susan Collins except maybe Lisa
• 41:21
  Speaker 1: Murkowski in Alaska.
• 41:22
  Speaker 2: Yeah, but she's in a Republican state. So she has.
• 41:25
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 41:26
  Speaker 2: You know, there is not a Democrat. You know who
• 41:28
  Speaker 2: the John Tester is the closest thing to Susan Collins left.
• 41:32
  Speaker 1: Right. And he won in 18. And Bullock did not
• 41:36
  Speaker 1: win in 20 in Montana. What could Democrats have argued instead?
• 41:40
  Speaker 1: I mean, you know, it's easy to talk about what
• 41:42
  Speaker 1: the campaign might have done wrong. If you're in Sarah
• 41:44
  Speaker 1: Gideon's position, you see all these outside groups running all
• 41:47
  Speaker 1: these ads that you really don't have control over. You
• 41:50
  Speaker 1: see the race tilting a little bit too much towards,
• 41:54
  Speaker 1: you know, hyperbole and painting Collins as some Trump McConnell stooge.
• 41:59
  Speaker 1: What do you do? What could she have done?
• 42:01
  Speaker 2: I mean, obviously you shift the balance more towards positive
• 42:06
  Speaker 2: ads for yourself, right? and let others carry the negative.
• 42:09
  Speaker 2: You could speak out against the third-party groups. That is
• 42:13
  Speaker 2: an old tactic that's sort of fallen by the wayside,
• 42:15
  Speaker 2: which is the outside money ban, where you ask your
• 42:19
  Speaker 2: opponent to agree to ban outside money. You actually have
• 42:22
  Speaker 2: no control over that, but you can... But, I mean,
• 42:24
  Speaker 2: candidates have had influence on it in the past. Obama
• 42:27
  Speaker 2: could not control super PACs in 2008, or could not
• 42:30
  Speaker 2: control outside groups in 2008. Super PACs didn't exist as
• 42:33
  Speaker 2: we currently understand them, President of the United States. And
• 42:36
  Speaker 2: people didn't give money to them for that reason. And
• 42:37
  Speaker 2: there was not outside money on Obama's behalf. Collins did,
• 42:41
  Speaker 2: I think, to a better extent than Gideon, as I
• 42:45
  Speaker 2: understand it, is weaponize the outside money against her. And
• 42:49
  Speaker 2: I think Gideon might have been able to push back
• 42:50
  Speaker 2: on that more. One thing, and there were so many
• 42:53
  Speaker 2: ads run, but one of the ads that was viewed
• 42:56
  Speaker 2: as most decisive for Collins and take that with a
• 43:00
  Speaker 2: grain of salt given all the results bias we've talked
• 43:02
  Speaker 2: about here is this ad with this famous Maine sportscaster
• 43:06
  Speaker 2: talking about the Susan Collins he knew and how these
• 43:08
  Speaker 2: outsiders who don't understand Maine were talking about it.
• 43:11
  Speaker 1: And he's a registered Democrat.
• 43:12
  Speaker 3: Yes.
• 43:13
  Speaker 2: I mean, like it is a classic permission structure ad
• 43:16
  Speaker 2: to get people to do something that they want to do,
• 43:19
  Speaker 2: but are hesitant to do. We can ascribe motive to
• 43:24
  Speaker 2: the outside groups on the Republican side, right? These are,
• 43:29
  Speaker 2: corporate funded. They are billionaire funded. They want lower taxes.
• 43:33
  Speaker 2: They want less regulation. They want to be able to
• 43:35
  Speaker 2: pollute and all of those things. And you may not
• 43:37
  Speaker 2: be able to ascribe that to the Susan Collins that
• 43:41
  Speaker 2: people know because I think you get a little close
• 43:46
  Speaker 2: to a caricature that's unbelievable to people who have voted
• 43:48
  Speaker 2: for many times. But you can do that with the
• 43:52
  Speaker 2: control of the Senate and what Republicans want and what
• 43:56
  Speaker 2: Susan Collins' election would mean. Even if she wants to
• 43:59
  Speaker 2: do better than that, it ultimately means that the corporations
• 44:03
  Speaker 2: that have polluted Maine or have shipped Maine jobs overseas,
• 44:07
  Speaker 2: manufacturing jobs in Maine overseas, they are the people who
• 44:10
  Speaker 2: benefit from that election, even if that's not what Susan
• 44:12
  Speaker 2: Collins wants. And she has not been strong enough to
• 44:14
  Speaker 2: stop those things from happening despite her independent streak.
• 44:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I think it is. I mean, it's what Collins
• 44:20
  Speaker 1: ended up doing to Gideon, which is painting Susan Collins
• 44:23
  Speaker 1: more as an outsider, right? Yes, she served Maine. You
• 44:28
  Speaker 1: could even, if you want to do a permission structure message,
• 44:31
  Speaker 1: it's Susan Collins has served Maine well for a long time,
• 44:34
  Speaker 1: but she's forgotten about Maine and she's gone Washington. And
• 44:38
  Speaker 1: we need a change. We need someone new who's actually
• 44:41
  Speaker 1: going to fight for us and fight for the things
• 44:43
  Speaker 1: that we need because Susan Collins has forgotten about us.
• 44:47
  Speaker 1: She spends more time with Mitch and Donald Trump and
• 44:49
  Speaker 1: the rest of them down in Washington and she's forgotten
• 44:51
  Speaker 1: about where she came from. That might have been a
• 44:54
  Speaker 1: better message.
• 44:55
  Speaker 2: Yeah, and there was some of that in their messaging
• 44:58
  Speaker 2: for sure. I think there's even softer version. If you
• 45:01
  Speaker 2: remember the message that scared the living shit out of
• 45:03
  Speaker 2: us in 2012, which was.
• 45:05
  Speaker 1: Yeah, I was just thinking about that.
• 45:06
  Speaker 2: It was Obama is a good guy. He tried his best.
• 45:10
  Speaker 2: He's not up to the task. Romney never did that
• 45:12
  Speaker 2: ad because he was too busy sort of running a
• 45:17
  Speaker 2: proto-Trumpian immigration campaign.
• 45:20
  Speaker 3: Mm-hmm.
• 45:21
  Speaker 2: I know he's our hero now, but that campaign sucked
• 45:23
  Speaker 2: and was filled with unsubtle racial messages.
• 45:26
  Speaker 3: Sorry.
• 45:27
  Speaker 2: Sorry, Resistance Twitter.
• 45:28
  Speaker 1: I know. I know. You're a big Mitt Romney fan.
• 45:32
  Speaker 2: But what that did was it separated what people were
• 45:36
  Speaker 2: positive of, which was Obama was a good guy who
• 45:39
  Speaker 2: really did have the best interests of the American people
• 45:41
  Speaker 2: at heart, and separated that from the result people saw,
• 45:44
  Speaker 2: which was the economy– was not as good as we
• 45:47
  Speaker 2: wanted it to be. People were still hurting. And I
• 45:48
  Speaker 2: think you could have possibly done something similar with Collins,
• 45:51
  Speaker 2: which is, look, Susan Collins is a, she's a good person.
• 45:54
  Speaker 2: She has worked hard for Maine for a very long time,
• 45:58
  Speaker 2: but either politics has changed or she has just been
• 46:00
  Speaker 2: unable to deliver because she, her voice is not, she's
• 46:03
  Speaker 2: not been able to use her quote unquote independent voice
• 46:05
  Speaker 2: to actually deliver for Maine because of the following things
• 46:08
  Speaker 2: that happened under Trump that the people of Maine clearly
• 46:11
  Speaker 2: disagree with because they voted against Trump, but by a
• 46:13
  Speaker 2: pretty large margin.
• 46:15
  Speaker 1: Well, part of the interesting story of what happened in Maine, too,
• 46:18
  Speaker 1: also involves Jared Golden, who won the second congressional district
• 46:24
  Speaker 1: in Maine in 2018 for the first time in an
• 46:28
  Speaker 1: extremely narrow race. I believe it was a ranked choice
• 46:32
  Speaker 1: voting race that he ended up with 50.5% of the vote.
• 46:34
  Speaker 1: And then This time around, 2020, when a bunch of
• 46:42
  Speaker 1: frontline Democrats who flipped seats in 2018 lost because of
• 46:46
  Speaker 1: a surge of Trump voters, Jared Golden not only won again,
• 46:51
  Speaker 1: but increased his margin to 53% in a year where
• 46:57
  Speaker 1: a bunch of his colleagues were defeated and Sarah Gideon
• 47:02
  Speaker 1: lost in the state in Maine. So what can we
• 47:05
  Speaker 1: learn about Jared Golden's win?
• 47:08
  Speaker 2: We should get Jared Gold on this pod and have
• 47:10
  Speaker 2: him explain it to us.
• 47:11
  Speaker 1: That's why it was my first thought. Let's get some
• 47:14
  Speaker 1: of that Jared Goldton magic, right?
• 47:17
  Speaker 2: That's right.
• 47:18
  Speaker 1: And so people know, just by the way, about the
• 47:20
  Speaker 1: main second congressional district. There's two congressional districts in Maine.
• 47:24
  Speaker 1: The first district is Southern Maine, where a lot of
• 47:26
  Speaker 1: the population is in Portland. And the second district is
• 47:30
  Speaker 1: the rest of the state. And it is just like
• 47:34
  Speaker 1: other trumpier districts and states across the country. It is
• 47:39
  Speaker 1: a lot of non-college educated white voters. It is very
• 47:42
  Speaker 1: white in general. It is more rural. It is exurban.
• 47:46
  Speaker 1: And so that is sort of the feel of, you know,
• 47:49
  Speaker 1: closed mill towns. That's sort of the feel of the
• 47:51
  Speaker 1: second congressional district in Maine.
• 47:54
  Speaker 2: I mean, Golden clearly found a message that resonated with
• 47:59
  Speaker 2: the exact voters that Democrats need to persuade in rural
• 48:04
  Speaker 2: areas across New England and the Midwest. It certainly was
• 48:08
  Speaker 2: economic in nature. It was less overtly partisan in nature.
• 48:13
  Speaker 2: There's a longer conversation about whether that's the right or
• 48:16
  Speaker 2: the wrong thing to do in the long term, but
• 48:18
  Speaker 2: he was able to pitch himself as a populist advocate
• 48:22
  Speaker 2: for Maine in a way that seemed open and accepting
• 48:26
  Speaker 2: of people who had different political views, which is how
• 48:28
  Speaker 2: he got it. Relatively– unprecedented level of ticket splitting and
• 48:33
  Speaker 2: a very highly polarized presidential election.
• 48:36
  Speaker 1: I didn't realize this. Do you know that Jared Golden
• 48:38
  Speaker 1: supports Medicare for All? He was the sponsor of Medicare
• 48:41
  Speaker 1: for All.
• 48:41
  Speaker 2: Yes, I know.
• 48:42
  Speaker 1: The Jayapal version in the house. So you had a
• 48:49
  Speaker 1: This is, I mean, this is, you know, I understand
• 48:51
  Speaker 1: why the left gets very annoyed at the party sometimes.
• 48:55
  Speaker 1: Like you had Sarah Gideon, who's not a supporter of
• 48:58
  Speaker 1: Medicare for All, lose the entire state by nine points.
• 49:03
  Speaker 1: And then you had Jared Golden win the conservative Trumpy
• 49:05
  Speaker 1: district by three points supporting Medicare for All. Now, we
• 49:09
  Speaker 1: should say it is not like Jared Golden is liberal
• 49:13
  Speaker 1: across the board, right? Like he, one of the final
• 49:16
  Speaker 1: press releases he put out in October was, was I
• 49:19
  Speaker 1: built he voted for that increased penalties for hurting cops.
• 49:23
  Speaker 1: Did not talk about defund the police, did not talk
• 49:26
  Speaker 1: about Green New Deal, but did talk about the environment
• 49:29
  Speaker 1: a lot and talk about climate, but talked about protecting
• 49:31
  Speaker 1: Maine's environment as a place where you hunt and fish,
• 49:34
  Speaker 1: sustaining farms, which there's some farming in Maine and also sustaining,
• 49:36
  Speaker 1: especially the water, in Maine and the ocean, because there's
• 49:41
  Speaker 1: of course a ton of fishing in Maine. So like
• 49:44
  Speaker 1: talked about a lot of these issues, but not in
• 49:47
  Speaker 1: a national sense as they were being debated in the
• 49:49
  Speaker 1: national sense and didn't talk much about Trump, talked about
• 49:51
  Speaker 1: all of them in the context of Maine and the
• 49:54
  Speaker 1: concerns that people in Maine had about these issues.
• 49:57
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 49:58
  Speaker 2: I mean, it's an, it is an incredible political feat
• 50:00
  Speaker 2: what he pulled off.
• 50:02
  Speaker 1: Truly.
• 50:02
  Speaker 3: Yeah.
• 50:03
  Speaker 1: And it is something that we should, I mean, look,
• 50:05
  Speaker 1: I will say though, in Maine, Gideon's loss was not
• 50:13
  Speaker 1: typical of the loss, and you said this at the beginning,
• 50:15
  Speaker 1: of a lot of Democrats across the country. It wasn't
• 50:18
  Speaker 1: that she just got swamped in rural and ex-urban areas
• 50:23
  Speaker 1: and completely ran up the score in urban areas and
• 50:27
  Speaker 1: liberal areas. Like Lewiston, second biggest city in Maine. It
• 50:32
  Speaker 1: is in the second congressional district. Biden easily wins it.
• 50:36
  Speaker 1: So does Jared Golden. Gideon loses Lewiston by two points.
• 50:40
  Speaker 1: In Southern Maine, around Portland, all the beach towns, York, Saco,
• 50:44
  Speaker 1: Old Orchard Beach, this is all where Emily's parents live.
• 50:48
  Speaker 1: Biden wins by 20 points or more. Gideon only wins
• 50:52
  Speaker 1: by five to seven points. So she lost everywhere or
• 50:56
  Speaker 1: she underperformed everywhere. It was not the story of like
• 51:00
  Speaker 1: a bunch of Trumpy voters coming out and with turnout
• 51:03
  Speaker 1: that we didn't expect. and swamping her. She lost voters
• 51:06
  Speaker 1: she should have won.
• 51:08
  Speaker 2: Maine is, when you describe it that way, it is
• 51:11
  Speaker 2: a place frozen in amber from a different time in politics.
• 51:17
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 51:18
  Speaker 2: We just don't see that anywhere else in that level
• 51:22
  Speaker 2: of ticket splitting. I mean, we should also stipulate Maine's
• 51:25
  Speaker 2: other senator is an independent. Their governor, who was their
• 51:28
  Speaker 2: governor for two terms, he was followed by a insane
• 51:33
  Speaker 2: governor who made Trump look normal, who then got reelected,
• 51:38
  Speaker 2: then made past Medicaid expansion. Like it is a unique
• 51:41
  Speaker 2: political state, if you will.
• 51:43
  Speaker 1: Well, and also Portland was the sixth biggest swing against
• 51:49
  Speaker 1: Trump of any metro area in the country. So on
• 51:54
  Speaker 1: the other side, you had like this huge swing against
• 51:57
  Speaker 1: Trump in Portland, because again, remember Biden does better than
• 52:00
  Speaker 1: Hillary does in Maine. So in some ways, the state
• 52:03
  Speaker 1: trended bluer. And actually, in most ways, the state trended
• 52:06
  Speaker 1: bluer because, of course, Collins won by less than she did.
• 52:11
  Speaker 1: But it wasn't enough. And I think Maine is unique
• 52:14
  Speaker 1: in many ways, but also Susan Collins, like we said,
• 52:17
  Speaker 1: is very unique. And I think looking forward, Collins retires.
• 52:23
  Speaker 1: I think that is a prime pickup opportunity for Democrats. Like,
• 52:27
  Speaker 1: I do not know that the next Republicans that runs
• 52:30
  Speaker 1: for the Senate in Maine after Collins has anywhere near
• 52:35
  Speaker 1: the kind of support that she has with people in Maine.
• 52:37
  Speaker 2: No, it is in these states that are trending in
• 52:40
  Speaker 2: one direction in an era of polarization, there is often
• 52:44
  Speaker 2: the last Democratic or Republican senator from that state. Like,
• 52:48
  Speaker 2: I hate to say this.
• 52:49
  Speaker 1: I was going to say, yeah, Joe Manchin.
• 52:52
  Speaker 2: Joe Manchin is the last Democratic senator from West Virginia
• 52:54
  Speaker 2: for a long time. John Tester, I hope he serves
• 52:57
  Speaker 2: until he's 112. But he is the last Democratic senator
• 53:01
  Speaker 2: in Montana probably for a long time.
• 53:04
  Speaker 1: Montana, I wonder about. I mean, there's young people moving
• 53:06
  Speaker 1: to Bozeman.
• 53:07
  Speaker 2: Well, I say that under– let me give two caveats
• 53:11
  Speaker 2: to a bold prediction, which is something I do not
• 53:14
  Speaker 2: do anymore. But two caveats are, is there always– There
• 53:18
  Speaker 2: are always these sort of one-off exceptions like Doug Jones
• 53:21
  Speaker 2: in Alabama, Heidi Heitkamp in North Dakota a few years ago,
• 53:26
  Speaker 2: where it's just the stars align and someone comes in
• 53:30
  Speaker 2: well against the partisan trend of that state and wins
• 53:34
  Speaker 2: and serves a term and then loses. The other way
• 53:38
  Speaker 2: is I say that under the assumption that we continue
• 53:41
  Speaker 2: on the same trend in terms of the coalitions that
• 53:45
  Speaker 2: make up the parties. And that, that is not necessarily
• 53:49
  Speaker 2: the case in either direction. Democrats could improve. They could
• 53:53
  Speaker 2: gain with some of the voters that make up the
• 53:57
  Speaker 2: second district of Maine or Montana or those States by improving, uh,
• 54:01
  Speaker 2: by learning whatever secret sauce Jared Golden has and taking
• 54:04
  Speaker 2: it nationally. Um, and Republicans can improve, you know, if they,
• 54:08
  Speaker 2: if this is a real trend with Republicans improving with, uh,
• 54:12
  Speaker 2: non-white voters like we saw in Robeson County, in North Carolina,
• 54:15
  Speaker 2: in Texas, in Florida, then they can flip states that
• 54:18
  Speaker 2: are on the margins now. So I don't want to
• 54:21
  Speaker 2: overstate how this is, but to your point, Maine is
• 54:25
  Speaker 2: incredibly unique. Susan Collins may be the last Democratic senator
• 54:28
  Speaker 2: from Maine for a long time.
• 54:29
  Speaker 1: Republican senator. Yeah. Yes, yes, yes, yes. It's also an
• 54:32
  Speaker 1: example of how perilous our situation is in the Senate
• 54:35
  Speaker 1: as Democrats, because there is now There's a very dwindling
• 54:39
  Speaker 1: number of Republican senators still sitting in states that Joe
• 54:43
  Speaker 1: Biden won.
• 54:45
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 54:45
  Speaker 1: And there, of course, there's who are the Democratic senators
• 54:49
  Speaker 1: sitting in states that Trump won at this point? Manchin
• 54:53
  Speaker 1: and Tester?
• 54:53
  Speaker 2: We have Manchin, Tester, Sherrod Brown.
• 54:58
  Speaker 1: Oh, Sherrod.
• 54:59
  Speaker 3: Yes.
• 55:00
  Speaker 1: Sherrod's also got to stay there forever.
• 55:02
  Speaker 2: Manchin, Tester. No one in the Upper West. No, I
• 55:06
  Speaker 2: think that's it. Many people will tell us what we
• 55:08
  Speaker 2: missed and the obvious thing we missed.
• 55:10
  Speaker 3: Right.
• 55:11
  Speaker 1: But anyway, it is dwindling. And if you just look
• 55:14
  Speaker 1: at the Biden map and the Trump map and you
• 55:18
  Speaker 1: assign Democratic and Republican senators to each candidate based on
• 55:21
  Speaker 1: the states that they won, we don't have the majority
• 55:24
  Speaker 1: we need.
• 55:27
  Speaker 3: No.
• 55:28
  Speaker 1: This is the problem. And so like you said, what
• 55:29
  Speaker 1: has to change is sort of the entire context of
• 55:33
  Speaker 1: the electoral coalitions that we have. That's the only way.
• 55:36
  Speaker 3: No.
• 55:36
  Speaker 2: I mean, you have to be in a situation– like
• 55:39
  Speaker 2: it doesn't have to be this exact map, but a
• 55:42
  Speaker 2: world in which you could actually have a governing majority
• 55:46
  Speaker 2: of Democrats is you get back to Obama 2012 levels
• 55:52
  Speaker 2: in Midwestern states like Iowa and Ohio, and you have
• 55:56
  Speaker 2: your Sunbelt expansion in Arizona where we already have the senators.
• 55:59
  Speaker 2: So there's no gain there, Georgia, and then you eventually
• 56:03
  Speaker 2: one day hope that Sooner or later, Texas moves in
• 56:06
  Speaker 2: that direction. And North Carolina is this thing we have
• 56:10
  Speaker 2: to figure out. North Carolina, like Obama won.
• 56:13
  Speaker 1: Maybe we'll do North Carolina next in our little series.
• 56:15
  Speaker 2: We actually should because North Carolina should not just be 2020.
• 56:18
  Speaker 2: It's like what has happened from 08 when Obama won it?
• 56:21
  Speaker 2: Like how does Roy Cooper win it twice? How do
• 56:23
  Speaker 2: we not win it? There's a lot to be talked there.
• 56:25
  Speaker 1: Yeah.
• 56:26
  Speaker 3: Okay.
• 56:26
  Speaker 1: Well, we'll talk about all this more in the weeks
• 56:29
  Speaker 1: and months to come. When we come back, you'll hear
• 56:32
  Speaker 1: Tommy and Ben's interview with Barack Obama.
• 56:43
  Speaker 4: We are thrilled and honored to welcome on our guest today,
• 56:47
  Speaker 4: President Barack Obama, the author of the new book, A
• 56:50
  Speaker 4: Promised Land.
• 56:51
  Speaker 2: President Obama, it's great to see you.
• 56:52
  Speaker 3: It is great to see you. More importantly, the guy
• 56:56
  Speaker 3: who launched Podcast The World. Let's face it. I I
• 57:06
  Speaker 3: get no royalties, but I am proud of you guys.
• 57:10
  Speaker 4: Sir, the check is in the mail. So Václav Havel
• 57:13
  Speaker 4: is a surprise star in this book. And for those
• 57:17
  Speaker 4: who don't know, Havel is a playwright.
• 57:18
  Speaker 2: He's a dissident.
• 57:19
  Speaker 4: He became the first president of the Czech Republic. And
• 57:23
  Speaker 4: in the book, we first encounter him during this stop
• 57:25
  Speaker 4: in Prague on one of your foreign trips. You guys
• 57:27
  Speaker 4: have a brief meeting. And I remember I was on
• 57:29
  Speaker 4: that trip, and I remember that meeting so well because
• 57:32
  Speaker 4: I had read Summer Meditations in college. And I brought
• 57:36
  Speaker 4: along my copy of the book right here with me
• 57:39
  Speaker 4: on the trip because I naively thought that spokespeople on
• 57:42
  Speaker 4: foreign trips with the president have time to read books.
• 57:45
  Speaker 1: That is not how it works.
• 57:47
  Speaker 4: But Havel is prescient in the way he warns you
• 57:50
  Speaker 4: about the double-edged sword of high expectations and then how
• 57:53
  Speaker 4: autocrats had evolved and how the economic crisis was strengthening
• 57:56
  Speaker 4: the forces of nationalism. And then you mentioned him again
• 57:59
  Speaker 4: in the context of the Cairo speech and then again
• 58:02
  Speaker 4: after your conversation with Prime Minister Singh about Hindu nationalism
• 58:05
  Speaker 4: and anti-Muslim sentiment in India. And so I guess my
• 58:08
  Speaker 4: question to you is just, what drew you to Havel?
• 58:11
  Speaker 4: And did you find it depressing talking with him about
• 58:15
  Speaker 4: the rise of nationalism and how easy it was to
• 58:18
  Speaker 4: predict and yet so difficult to prevent?
• 58:21
  Speaker 3: Well, look, what drew me to him was what had
• 58:25
  Speaker 3: drawn you to him. I had read his works in college.
• 58:30
  Speaker 3: And as I write about he was the example of
• 58:36
  Speaker 3: someone who had grown out of a mass movement, a
• 58:41
  Speaker 3: social movement from the bottom up, had then entered politics
• 58:47
  Speaker 3: and his soul had remained intact, right? So, you know,
• 58:52
  Speaker 3: there were a handful of political leaders that I look
• 58:58
  Speaker 3: to as an example, because as I described, my inspiration
• 59:04
  Speaker 3: wasn't JFK or you know, some other elected official. My inspiration,
• 59:11
  Speaker 3: you know, was Gandhi and like Melissa and, you know,
• 59:18
  Speaker 3: the civil rights workers in SNCC. And it took me
• 59:24
  Speaker 3: a while to feel comfortable with the idea that you
• 59:27
  Speaker 3: could bring about change through electoral politics, because I had
• 59:31
  Speaker 3: this sort of skepticism that I think a lot of
• 59:33
  Speaker 3: young people, at least growing up in America, had towards politicians.
• 59:38
  Speaker 3: And so when I see Havel and Mandela, really those
• 59:44
  Speaker 3: were the two where I thought, oh, you can make
• 59:47
  Speaker 3: that transition, retain some sense of connection to the mass
• 59:52
  Speaker 3: movement that produced you, and still enter into government. So
• 59:57
  Speaker 3: So that was why I was keen on meeting him.
• 1:00:02
  Speaker 3: It's interesting, when I met him, it was early enough
• 1:00:07
  Speaker 3: in my presidency that I found the meeting inspiring, but
• 1:00:12
  Speaker 3: not depressing, because I thought that the caution he gave me,
• 1:00:18
  Speaker 3: which was that, you know, you're going to be burdened
• 1:00:23
  Speaker 3: by high expectations, people thinking that you're going to wave
• 1:00:26
  Speaker 3: a magic wand and suddenly a lot of these historical
• 1:00:30
  Speaker 3: forces are going to go away. But also his warning
• 1:00:34
  Speaker 3: that there was an illusion that somehow after the Berlin
• 1:00:42
  Speaker 3: Wall came down, that somehow all issues of nationalism and
• 1:00:49
  Speaker 3: conflict in Europe were gone. those were things that I
• 1:00:56
  Speaker 3: understood intellectually, but I think it was early enough in
• 1:01:02
  Speaker 3: my presidency where I felt like, yeah, I see that,
• 1:01:05
  Speaker 3: but I'll be able to overcome those things. And the
• 1:01:08
  Speaker 3: reason I think that it recurs as a theme throughout
• 1:01:11
  Speaker 3: the book is because I keep on coming back to
• 1:01:13
  Speaker 3: it and I start saying, yeah, this is harder and deeper.
• 1:01:16
  Speaker 3: And there's more stubborn resistance to a vision of a
• 1:01:29
  Speaker 3: inclusive democratic liberal order than maybe I had anticipated. And
• 1:01:35
  Speaker 3: so that becomes sort of a marker for me that
• 1:01:41
  Speaker 3: I find myself drawn back to in a number of
• 1:01:46
  Speaker 3: circumstances throughout my presidency.
• 1:01:48
  Speaker 4: You spend a lot of time in the book Talking
• 1:01:50
  Speaker 4: about the war in Afghanistan, you spent a lot of
• 1:01:52
  Speaker 4: time in your first term working on the war in Afghanistan.
• 1:01:56
  Speaker 4: In 2009, in particular, the White House conducted two separate
• 1:01:59
  Speaker 4: reviews of the policy, one of which was quite extensive.
• 1:02:02
  Speaker 4: It was chaired by you personally, and you ended up
• 1:02:05
  Speaker 4: sending additional troops to Afghanistan twice that year. So two
• 1:02:09
  Speaker 4: questions for you. I mean, first, you're very candid in
• 1:02:12
  Speaker 4: the book about tensions that developed between you and the
• 1:02:15
  Speaker 4: White House and Pentagon leadership during that process, especially Bob
• 1:02:19
  Speaker 4: Gates's and Admiral Mike Mullen. And I was hoping you
• 1:02:21
  Speaker 4: could tell the story of that contentious Oval Office meeting
• 1:02:25
  Speaker 4: and maybe just what it felt like in the moment
• 1:02:27
  Speaker 4: to feel, I think, jammed is the word that was
• 1:02:29
  Speaker 4: used most often, by the Pentagon as a decision as
• 1:02:32
  Speaker 4: significant as sending more troops into harm's way. And then second,
• 1:02:36
  Speaker 4: I mean, when we sit here today and we look
• 1:02:38
  Speaker 4: at the war in Afghanistan and how it's going, you know,
• 1:02:41
  Speaker 4: 11 years after you took office, which was well after
• 1:02:43
  Speaker 4: the war started, is there part of you that wonders whether,
• 1:02:47
  Speaker 4: you know, we could have sent fewer troops into into
• 1:02:50
  Speaker 4: battle and the conditions would be the same? We could
• 1:02:52
  Speaker 4: have further resisted some of the demands from the Pentagon
• 1:02:55
  Speaker 4: for more, more, more?
• 1:02:57
  Speaker 3: Well, the tension was, I think, well-meaning on all sides.
• 1:03:08
  Speaker 3: Afghanistan was a tough problem. And I think, as I
• 1:03:13
  Speaker 3: describe in the book, a lot of the tensions arose
• 1:03:17
  Speaker 3: out of the fact that Washington policymakers had embarked on
• 1:03:27
  Speaker 3: a bad policy in Iraq, diverted a huge amount of
• 1:03:31
  Speaker 3: resources from Afghanistan. And so by the time we get in,
• 1:03:37
  Speaker 3: we've essentially, I won't say lost six years, but six
• 1:03:41
  Speaker 3: years in which it might've been possible immediately after driving
• 1:03:45
  Speaker 3: the Taliban out to make a big investment in Afghanistan
• 1:03:50
  Speaker 3: to essentially do some nation building there so that you
• 1:03:55
  Speaker 3: could consolidate some of the gains that had been made
• 1:03:58
  Speaker 3: in terms of development and education and anti-corruption efforts. That's
• 1:04:03
  Speaker 3: not what had happened. What had occurred though in Iraq
• 1:04:08
  Speaker 3: was because of some of the screw ups by folks
• 1:04:12
  Speaker 3: like Bremer and Rumsfeld and others, essentially the Bush administration
• 1:04:20
  Speaker 3: administration had turned over the keys to the generals. They
• 1:04:24
  Speaker 3: had done a pretty extraordinary job just of stabilizing Iraq.
• 1:04:34
  Speaker 3: Petraeus genuinely did make significant gains in stemming the bloodshed
• 1:04:42
  Speaker 3: in part with the assistance of folks like Ryan Crocker
• 1:04:44
  Speaker 3: and the diplomatic work and the brokering of deals with
• 1:04:49
  Speaker 3: Sunni tribal leaders in Iraq and so forth. But what
• 1:04:51
  Speaker 3: happens is more and more the Pentagon essentially is making policy.
• 1:04:58
  Speaker 3: Sometimes in conjunction with the CIA, but you have less
• 1:05:04
  Speaker 3: civilian control of the policy making apparatus in Iraq. Those
• 1:05:08
  Speaker 3: habits built up. So by the time we come in,
• 1:05:13
  Speaker 3: in some ways the path has been charted for Iraq, right?
• 1:05:17
  Speaker 3: There's gonna be a wind down, And the question for
• 1:05:21
  Speaker 3: me is just how do we execute and implement and
• 1:05:24
  Speaker 3: stay on track with that? But in Afghanistan now, the
• 1:05:29
  Speaker 3: impulse I think is to duplicate what from the Pentagon's
• 1:05:34
  Speaker 3: view at least worked in Iraq, which is let's just
• 1:05:38
  Speaker 3: put more in and we will double down. And as
• 1:05:44
  Speaker 3: you guys will recall, the phrase that was repeated again
• 1:05:50
  Speaker 3: and again was, you know, you gotta listen to the
• 1:05:54
  Speaker 3: generals on the ground. They know better, write them a
• 1:05:58
  Speaker 3: check and get out of the way. That's what I
• 1:06:01
  Speaker 3: was resisting. And so, you know, the tensions I had
• 1:06:04
  Speaker 3: with Bob Gates and Mike Mullen in part also growing
• 1:06:09
  Speaker 3: out of statements made by Dave Petraeus and General McChrystal
• 1:06:15
  Speaker 3: and others, as I say in that chapter, I didn't
• 1:06:20
  Speaker 3: doubt their sincerity, right? They genuinely believed that we had
• 1:06:25
  Speaker 3: to initiate what was called a coin strategy, a full
• 1:06:30
  Speaker 3: coin strategy in Afghanistan to be successful, meaning a counterinsurgency strategy,
• 1:06:35
  Speaker 3: a lot more resources, a lot more troops, a lot
• 1:06:38
  Speaker 3: more money. The problem was that those habits of not
• 1:06:46
  Speaker 3: having civilian interference and asking questions, hey, this is gonna
• 1:06:50
  Speaker 3: cost us an extra 10, 20, $ 30 billion. What does
• 1:06:56
  Speaker 3: this mean we can't do with respect to our national
• 1:06:58
  Speaker 3: security if we're making that huge of a commitment in Afghanistan?
• 1:07:02
  Speaker 3: Those kinds of questions hadn't been asked for a while.
• 1:07:06
  Speaker 3: And so the assumption was once the generals made a decision,
• 1:07:12
  Speaker 3: then that was sort of the end of the conversation.
• 1:07:15
  Speaker 3: That's what I resisted. What I try to reflect in
• 1:07:18
  Speaker 3: that chapter is not any ill will on anybody's side,
• 1:07:21
  Speaker 3: but as you point out, there does come a point
• 1:07:25
  Speaker 3: in which I call in Gates and I call in
• 1:07:31
  Speaker 3: Mullen and I say to him, listen, when I ask
• 1:07:37
  Speaker 3: for a deliberative process to figure out what we're gonna
• 1:07:40
  Speaker 3: do on this very difficult strategy, I don't expect it
• 1:07:43
  Speaker 3: to be litigated in the press. And to some degree
• 1:07:48
  Speaker 3: that helped stop that. But as I record in a
• 1:07:54
  Speaker 3: later chapter, I think General McChrystal still had those habits
• 1:07:59
  Speaker 3: and he was an extraordinary warrior who had taken over
• 1:08:03
  Speaker 3: in Afghanistan, had done some incredible work in Iraq. I
• 1:08:09
  Speaker 3: actually thought very highly of him, but when he does
• 1:08:13
  Speaker 3: this Rolling Stone article, Revealing this general skepticism towards all
• 1:08:19
  Speaker 3: civilian restraint or control, I had to relieve him of
• 1:08:25
  Speaker 3: his duties, and that was a very difficult decision. As
• 1:08:28
  Speaker 3: far as the substance of Afghanistan, look, at the time,
• 1:08:33
  Speaker 3: I had to ask myself the question, how much of
• 1:08:36
  Speaker 3: a difference will these additional troops make? So I continue
• 1:08:41
  Speaker 3: to ask that question. My instinct is that things were
• 1:08:49
  Speaker 3: perilous enough, tenuous enough at the time that if we
• 1:08:54
  Speaker 3: had not put in more resources at that time, we're
• 1:08:59
  Speaker 3: talking about 2009, 2010 to 2011, that the Taliban really
• 1:09:07
  Speaker 3: would have or could have overrun the major urban areas
• 1:09:11
  Speaker 3: in Afghanistan. And that outcome at the time was not tolerable,
• 1:09:18
  Speaker 3: given the fact that Al-Qaeda was still active, and the
• 1:09:23
  Speaker 3: prospect of Afghanistan once again being a base for terrorist
• 1:09:28
  Speaker 3: activity against the homeland was not a position that I
• 1:09:34
  Speaker 3: was willing to take. What I think always made the
• 1:09:40
  Speaker 3: decision difficult was that I knew even with those additional troops,
• 1:09:44
  Speaker 3: we were not going to remake Afghanistan. But it did
• 1:09:49
  Speaker 3: purchase us the time to engage in the strategic defeat
• 1:09:54
  Speaker 3: of Al-Qaeda and to some degree, stabilize Afghanistan enough where
• 1:10:04
  Speaker 3: if in fact, we now start drawing down troops all
• 1:10:09
  Speaker 3: the way, there is at least the possibility, the prospect
• 1:10:13
  Speaker 3: that Afghan security forces can take action maybe engage enough
• 1:10:21
  Speaker 3: with the Taliban and other forces there to get a
• 1:10:24
  Speaker 3: stalemate and to keep terrorism from re-blasping in that region.
• 1:10:31
  Speaker 3: But nowhere is the uncertainties of the presidency greater than
• 1:10:41
  Speaker 3: when you're talking about a situation like Afghanistan. in terms
• 1:10:46
  Speaker 3: of seeing how it's going to play out and trying
• 1:10:49
  Speaker 3: to engage in counterfactuals about what would have happened if
• 1:10:53
  Speaker 3: you had made a different decision at any given point.
• 1:10:56
  Speaker 4: Well, there are so many more things we could have
• 1:10:59
  Speaker 4: asked you about in the book. There's the bin Laden operation,
• 1:11:02
  Speaker 4: the Arab Spring, the Middle East peace talks. There is
• 1:11:04
  Speaker 4: great just family stuff. There's Reggie stories. Couldn't get enough
• 1:11:08
  Speaker 4: of those.
• 1:11:08
  Speaker 2: There's Iowa.
• 1:11:10
  Speaker 4: But you have been incredibly gracious with your time, President Obama.
• 1:11:13
  Speaker 4: So thank you so much. Everyone should check out A
• 1:11:15
  Speaker 4: Promised Land.
• 1:11:16
  Speaker 1: And it was great to talk to you.
• 1:11:17
  Speaker 3: It was fun. Thank you, guys.
• 1:11:24
  Speaker 1: Thanks, everyone. We will have an episode next week on Monday.
• 1:11:29
  Speaker 1: It will be a mailbag episode with me and Dan.
• 1:11:32
  Speaker 1: And then you'll hear the Monday after there will be
• 1:11:35
  Speaker 1: a special New Year's episode with John and Tommy. So
• 1:11:39
  Speaker 1: tune in. Happy holidays, everyone.
• 1:11:41
  Speaker 3: Bye, everyone.
• 1:11:46
  Speaker 1: Pod Save America is a Crooked Media production. The executive
• 1:11:49
  Speaker 1: producer is Michael Martinez. Our associate producer is Jordan Waller.
• 1:11:53
  Speaker 1: It's mixed and edited by Andrew Chadwick. Kyle Seglin is
• 1:11:56
  Speaker 1: our sound engineer. Thanks to Tanya Somenator, Katie Long, Roman Papadimitriou,
• 1:12:01
  Speaker 1: Quinn Lewis, Caroline Rustin, and Justine Howe for production support.
• 1:12:04
  Speaker 1: And to our digital team, Elijah Cohn, Narmal Konian, Yale Freed,
• 1:12:08
  Speaker 1: and Milo Kim, who film and upload these episodes as
• 1:12:11
  Speaker 1: videos every week.