May 17, 2024 • 50 mins
Jeet Heer of The Nation plays out how Biden can win back support from the left. Dan Nathan of the On The Tape Podcast examines the new economic numbers and what we can expect from the US economy in the coming months. Jacob Rubashkin of Inside Elections details the races that will determine the appearance of our government in 2025.
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Hi, I'm Molly John Fast and this is Fast Politics
where we discuss the top political headlines with some of
today's best minds. And the North Carolina Senate has banned
wearing masks in public places. We have such a great
show for you today. On the tape podcast, Dan Nathan
talks to us about the new economic numbers and what
(00:22):
we can expect from the US economy in the coming months.
Then we'll talk to Inside Elections Jacob Rubashkin about the
races that will determine what our government looks like in
twenty twenty five. But first we have the host of
the Time of Monsters the Nations ged here. Welcome back
(00:43):
to Fast Politics, ged.
Speaker 2 (00:45):
Here, and good to be back.
Speaker 1 (00:48):
Let's talk about it. It's Supreme Court season aka watching
six lunatics remake our federal government in the image of
the Koch Brothers.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
Discuss actually like today, there was a little bit of
good news because there was the kind of fear that
the courts would follow the attempt of the Fifth Circuit
to basically run their like large price of the government
illegal and then return America the glory days of child labor.
Speaker 1 (01:16):
That's still on the agenda.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
But they decided today. It was out that day, So
what is grateful for whatever small verses by can offer us,
that's a more positive sign. What were the other cases?
Speaker 1 (01:27):
There are more cases coming. I want you to sort
of talk us through. You wrote this piece about the
anti war movement needing to claim its victories, So talk
to us about what that means, because I do think
there's been a really interesting shift in American life when
it comes to being against foreign wars.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
Well, yeah, that's actually absolutely a really good point. But
I think on the current stuff, a lot of people
are very mad at Biden, and I'm one of them.
Support of what ness Hiwu's governments has been doing has
been above and beyond is a con for like many months,
and he should have acted earlier, but it is all
the more striking considering who he is and his history
on this issue. He is taking steps that no previous
(02:08):
American president has in terms of cutting back on sending
weapons now, so leaving this ideal should have happened sooner.
It is happening, and I don't think it would have
happened if it weren't for you know, the protests that
we're seeing not just on campuses, but earlier the end
committed move in. So I think Biden realizes this coalition
isn't behind him on this. And the polling is quite striking.
(02:30):
I mean, this majority close to the Israeli war in Gaza,
but it's a super majority among Democrats. People voted for
Biden in twenty twenty. You're looking at like, you know,
depending on the poll, seventy seventy five percent of post
the anti war movement deserves credit and they should push on.
I think that what he want to hear is among
some people is almost self sabotage of like oh, you know,
(02:52):
like it's so tiny, he doesn't really read it. He's
going to reverse it. And the attitude, well it's too little,
too late, as he like an an ongoing political moment.
Like I think that's the wrong attitude. I think you
have to say, like, okay, this guy is starting to
listen to us, something that Donald Trump would never do.
By the way, and of course we got to push
him more. We've got to push him far there. We're
not gonna like relent on pushing him, but he has
(03:15):
moving forward, and we have to like, you know, create
an incentive structure so that Biden knows that you know,
if he wants to get the approval. He's getting some approval.
Now you'll get even more if he goes further. My
piece of really criticizing the sort of self sabotage of
people within the movement that are like trying to deny
the significance of what we're seeing, because I actually do
think it's it's pretty significant where Biden is going, and
(03:36):
I think we're probably gonna see more of that, and
I would have I think, you know, beyond Biden, like
there's a lot of indication that people in the broader administration,
include the State devironment, aren't very happy with what Israel
is doing. You know, I think what has to reach
out to those people and create conditions where they feel
emboldened to speak out it and they feel embolded.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
That but there was a real aggressive when today on marijuana.
Will you talk a.
Speaker 2 (04:03):
Little bit about that again, This is something actually somebody's
very related to, like Israel, in the sense of like,
you know, there's something that I might feel like, well,
Biden is done is a little bit earlier. There's a
little bit people have been pushing him to do for
like a long time. I think Biden's history and who
he is is maybe pertinent to this. It's maybe not
something that comes natural to him for like a bunch
(04:25):
of reasons, including I think personal reasons. Having said that,
he is someone who can be pushed, he's something someone
who can be moved, And to me, like that's the
most pertinent political lesson to be learned from this.
Speaker 1 (04:37):
Yeah, I think so too. And I actually think like
we've seen this with other things in Biden world, where
he sort of makes this choice to do the more
progressive thing, and it's quite cool. I mean with the
marijuana staff, that's something that pretty much across the board
people really support and could be meaningful in all sorts
(05:00):
of ways.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Oh no, absolutely no, it's gonna like materially make people's
lives better. It is something that has like super majority
of support. And I have to ask myself, you know
where the popular stat you know, like there's a whole
wing of these sort of Savai political consultants and strategists.
He were saying, Yo, we have to do the popular thing.
This is like doing the popular thing, although they were
(05:22):
for some weird reason, they never foregrounded this issue as
one of the popular things to do. I will also
mention a lot of the student dead reliefs that we've
been seeing. The only thing I would maybe say is,
you know, I'd like to see the White House get
a little bit more on front on some of this stuff,
where to maybe call us this more into like a
message of like see what we're doing. And for whatever reason,
(05:43):
like that little bit is not quite coalescing, although that
could change, is you know, the election heats up here.
Speaker 1 (05:49):
We are, we're ten thousand days from this election. We're
all gonna die. All anyone talks about is freaking out
about out this whole thing. Jesse just said, one hundred
and seventy three days. No, Jesse, it's ten thousand days.
Give us a little good news.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
Well, actually, I think like even in some of the
bad news people are reporting, I think there is a
kind of good news because I noticed that, like all,
you know, like there were some polls showing Biden is
behind in the swing stage, but those same polls show
that the actually Democratic candidates for the Senate in those
places are doing well and are overperforming Biden. Now, if
(06:30):
you think about it, like are there really people that
are going to in vast numbers vote for a Democratic
senatorial candidate and.
Speaker 1 (06:38):
Leave the top of the ticket blank.
Speaker 2 (06:39):
It seems crazy, Yeah, are going to vote for Biden?
Speaker 3 (06:43):
I don't really know.
Speaker 1 (06:43):
We want Trump, yeah exactly.
Speaker 2 (06:45):
So I actually think that what those polling shows is
I think, like the Democratic agenda is popular. You know,
that's congruent with what we saw in the mid terms
and what we've seen in special elections, and that a
lot of the poor polling that Biden's having, it's just
people registering their dissatisfaction, Like they're gonna vote for Biden,
but they don't want to say so right now because
(07:06):
they're mad at him. We're disappointed them for various reasons.
So I actually think, if you know, if I don't
encourage anyone to be obsessed with the polls at all.
Speaker 1 (07:13):
Especially one hundred and seventy three days aft.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
Yeah, but if you are like actually like look at
the fact that, hey, you know, like the Democratic Party
is in good shape, and ask to yourself, if the
party is in good shape, what is the likely results
for the top figure. The other I think kind of
good news is like the debate stuff, which I thought
was a really smart move.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
I hear you're free on Wednesdays.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
You know, they're going to have fairly early debates. I think,
contrary to popular wisdom, Biden does well and then Trump
as he does poorly. And I actually think that fairly
early on the starkness of the choice between Biden and
Trump is going to become a parent and I think
that's actually going to start narrowing this thing and solidifying. You. Yeah,
I actually think like overall, you know, I don't. I
(07:58):
would not say people should be terrified. I think that
it's going to be like a tight election. People are
gonna have to pull things together.
Speaker 1 (08:05):
You'd rather be the Dems than the Republicans, I think so. Yes,
Donald Trump sits in a courthouse right now.
Speaker 2 (08:12):
Yeah, well, I mean that's the other thing. But you know,
we've seen the Republicans embrace of Trump, and I think
that's come with some political costs. But like the extent
that they're embracing him now, not just that Trump's in
the courthouse, but like all these party leaders are joining
him the courthouse and are joining him to like insult
the judge.
Speaker 1 (08:29):
I think that hurts him. I think it hurts the
party if you want to keep the House.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
And yeah, ways, I don't think we can measure yet,
but I think that, you know, the full extent that
they've embraced not just Trump, but Trump's criminality, that's going
to have a lasting legacy. I mean I think, like,
you know, like January sixth had a lasting legacy, and
that's why the Dems overperformed in the rich terms. And
like this is like, you know, this is kind of
a variation on January sixth. It's an open defiance of
(08:55):
the rule of law. And I think there's a lot
of people, you know, might not agree with the Dems
on all political things, but they kind of understand the
United States has to be like a nation of laws,
and like what Trump is doing now it's like you're
staring into the abyss of being like, you know, like
let's go to court anarchy, you know.
Speaker 1 (09:12):
So let's talk about Donald Trump in court. Right now,
his former lawyer is being cross examined by his current lawyer,
Todd Blande, who is a prosecutor. I mean, this is
this weird moment in Trump world where Trump has actually
gotten pretty good lawyers and now he's making them be
bad lawyers by bossing them around.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
Yeah, I do mean this is one reason why usually
he has bad lawyers because they're the ones that put
up with it. Oh, I mean it's interesting. I've thought
about this a little bit, Like it is interesting that
the one place you can get good lawyers is in
a kind of criminal case. That's maybe because he's more
used to like that kind of legal scenario than he
is with some of the more issues of constitutional law
(09:58):
or election law, that he's deafliped with this kind of
case involving you know, sort of mafio. So like kickbacks
and favors is Donald Trump's terrain. But having said that, like, yeah,
I'm not super optimistic about this as a legal case,
Like I think it's actually kind of hard to draw
these ways in which they can attack the witnesses.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
It's a little hanky.
Speaker 3 (10:18):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (10:18):
Yeah. But having said that, I mean, like, you know,
if anyone's gonna sabotage a legal case.
Speaker 1 (10:24):
It's going to be Donald Trump, right, It's true.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
Oh yeah, yeah, no, I you know, his recording court
has left been that great. I mean you have, especially
what considers all the court cases that were brought coming
out of the twenty twenty election. So yeah, I actually
think it's kind of been fascinating to watch and maybe
the root of all this is that he's always felt
he's been about the law, and unfortunately for most of
(10:47):
his life he's been right. Like, how many things has
this guy done that are like, you know, borderline criminal
or criminal that we're never brought up, we'll never know.
It's a lot and this sense of impunity. I can
do what I want, I can the judges. That's really
a product of a lifetime. But have you said that.
I think very ordinary people watching this stuff, you know,
like I can't feel that they would be very sepulate
(11:08):
to Trump. And I think that, you know, there's like
this fundamental attack on the rule of law, not just
why what he did criminally, but by the attacks on
the judges and the political attacks. I think that's going
to resonate.
Speaker 1 (11:19):
Yeah, you know, I think so much about how he
thinks he's doing something brilliant here by making this case
about law and not about his criminality, and like it's
worked for him with the primary voters, who are so
predisposed to him that they'll pretty much go along with anything.
(11:39):
But I'm not convinced that you can win anyone else
who doesn't have total Trump derangement syndrome.
Speaker 2 (11:46):
Yeah, I know, I think that's right. I think that
he's decided to make it in a way that people
have to choose, like, you know, do they go into
the Trump culture or do they like go along with
the normal reality that they've lived in their own life.
That's helped win the primaries, is not people that were
already in the Trump call that if that's the choice,
then he wins. But like if you're putting into the
broader public, no, I don't think he wins. And in fact,
(12:08):
I think it will remind people why they don't like him,
which I think is actually very important. I think, like,
you know, he's been out of the spot like long
enough that some people have forgotten. Maybe it's start the
big takeaway of the court cases, Like it's a big
reminder of why you do not want this guy that
I does. You know, why he's a bad and dangerous fan.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
Yeah, but it is interesting to see members of Congress,
the Speaker of the United States has representatives people for
whom they should know better up there being like this
is our guy.
Speaker 3 (12:40):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (12:41):
No, you know what it reminded me of, Like as
a New Yorker, you'll remember mister Gotti, well respected businessman,
a member of the community and was a very stricting thing.
That's like, you know, because he was a bobster with
as certain support in the community, there were people who
rallied to him. She's like, this is very similar, except that,
(13:01):
you know, like it's not just like a small community
in New York. It's like the weight of like, you know,
one of the two major political parties on one level. Like,
to me, this is the threat, right, the threat of
a trump pized Republican party that shares his contempt for law.
And that's a scary thing. But I think that's also
something Joe Biden can run on. Everything is already in
(13:24):
very stark relief, and one of the things Democrats have
to do is to just make sure everyone in America
knows this is the choice.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, no, I agree, a really good point.
Let's talk about Eric Adams for two minutes. Sure, he's
our mayor in New York whatever. He was recently in
Rome with the Pope. Can you just make it make sense?
Speaker 2 (13:47):
Well, I guess Eric Addam likes to see himself as
an international figure. I mean it is a kind of
perhaps charming thing. I actually remember, like he's running for Rayre.
He said that he had wanted to be buried in Israel,
and people asked where, and he said the goal at Heights,
which is actually disputed territory, or is actually Syrian territory.
(14:08):
So I guess New York has a very international mayor.
But perhaps the other thing is, like, you know what,
you're as widely hated as Eric Adams is, having so
much trouble domestically, maybe you go abroad. That's what sort
of presidents who are trouble often do. It happens that
I guess if you're aware of New York, you can
do the same thing exactly.
Speaker 1 (14:28):
Jesus Christ, Thank you jet here, thank you Spring is here.
And I bet you are trying to look fashionable, So
why not pick up some fashionable all new Fast Politics merchandise.
We just opened a news store with all new designs
(14:49):
just for you. Get t shirts, hoodies, hats, and top bags.
To grab some, head to Fastpolitics dot com. Dan Nathan
is the host of the On the Tape podcast and
a c NBC Fast Money contributor.
Speaker 3 (15:04):
Dan Nathan my John Cast.
Speaker 1 (15:08):
Welcome. I am so happy to have you here. You
know you're like one of my people.
Speaker 4 (15:13):
Well you know you're one of my must listens to
three times a week on Fast Politics. So it is
my sincere pleasure to be on with you this week.
Speaker 1 (15:21):
So let us talk about all of the economic news yesterday,
because there was a lot on Wednesday. We had like
a number of numbers. So explain to us what all
those numbers were, sort of break it down for us.
Speaker 3 (15:36):
All right, let's do it, okay, So listen.
Speaker 4 (15:37):
You know, I'm mostly focused on the markets, and a
lot of this economic data that comes out almost every
day is important to how investors perceive the health of
the economy, and thus they expressed those views in the markets,
whether it be the stock market, whether they be the
bond market, commodities and a like. So yesterday was the
April CPI reading, that's the main reading for inflation. It
(15:58):
came in slightly below expectations, but it's still up three
point four percent year over year, right, And you could say, well,
that's good, because I remember a year and a half
ago those inflation readings were coming in north of nine
percent or so.
Speaker 3 (16:11):
But here's the problem. Disinflation.
Speaker 4 (16:13):
While it's great for you know, most consumers, it's still
really bad for a lot of consumers. So at three
point four percent. That is up year over year, right,
so if you're spending on a whole host of things,
it's still up. It's down from the highs, you know,
almost two years ago, but it's still up. There was
also some data out there on retail sales which were
weaker than expected. So the longer that you have periods
(16:36):
of high inflation, right sooner or later, it's going to
weigh on consumer confidence and retail sales. And that's what
we're seeing here a little bit. And we also have
the Federal Reserve Chairman Powell was out earlier in the
week basically saying that interest rates are going to remain
higher for probably a little longer than they had expected
because they're still trying to battle high levels of inflation
(16:58):
with high interest rates, which is also weighing on a
certain set of consumers that use basically credit to finance
a whole host of different purchases.
Speaker 1 (17:07):
And also people want to buy houses. I mean, the
fundamental problem here, I feel like is we're in a
kind of mobi a strip which is high inflation makes
interest rates higher. High interest rates makes it impossible to
buy a house. Air go, you have housing being more expensive.
(17:28):
The only way to get that number down is probably
to cut interest rates.
Speaker 4 (17:32):
Well, yeah, and if they start to cut interest rates
too early, you run the risk of basically inflation heating
back up again. So it is a bit of a
conundrum that the Federal Reserve has right now. There are
massive political implications for this. You know, a lot of
folks think that if the Fed could just kind of
wave their wand in lower interest rates, that that's going
to help a certain sort of consumer here. But the
(17:54):
truth is it might cause oil to go back higher, right,
it might cause you know, some of these rents to
go back. I mean, there's a whole host of things here.
So that whole conundrum about being able to buy a
house because mortgage rates are so high, or a car,
you run the risk of okay, rent being higher than
you know, the cost of rent is greater right now,
(18:15):
for the.
Speaker 3 (18:15):
First time in a very long time, than the cost
of buying.
Speaker 4 (18:17):
A house, right So there's a whole host of things
that kind of play into this, and none of them
are playing particularly well for the Biden administration right now.
So that's one of the reasons why you don't hear
them talk a whole heck of a lot about their
kind of you know, inclination for lower interest rates. We
know that Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren came out, i
want to say, a couple months ago with an open
(18:38):
letter to fed share Pal suggesting that they better lower
rates soon. I don't think those two know what they're
talking about at the moment right now, because the worst
thing that could happen for the Biden administration into the
November election is that you know, you see inflation picked
back up, and that really going to hurt a voting
block in Middle America or in certain social economic you
(19:00):
know what I mean sort of demos that they really
need to win the reelection here and again, So there's
no easy answer right now.
Speaker 1 (19:07):
The thing about the interest rates problem is, and I
think this is really what Chairman Powell is worried about,
is that if you cut interest rates too soon, you
really could end up just kicking inflation back. I mean,
even though people hate inflation and they're not happy with
it relatively speaking, and again, this doesn't make people who
(19:31):
can't buy a house feel better. It's been bad, but
it hasn't crashed us into a recession, which a lot
of people were worried it would.
Speaker 3 (19:38):
No doubt about it.
Speaker 4 (19:39):
But in certain swaths of the American public, they feel
like they're deeply in a recession. And all you have
to do is go back and look at some of
the comments that you heard from McDonald's, from Starbucks, from Disney.
I mean, the list goes on and on these consumer
oriented companies, and you could say, well, Disney is consumer discretionary.
If you're spending seven dollars for a latte on a
daily basis, you could trade down to the food truck
(20:00):
on the.
Speaker 3 (20:01):
Corner at a dollar.
Speaker 4 (20:02):
But when McDonald's talks about their consumers trading down from
five or six dollars, value meals where are they trading
down to, right, And so that is the consumer that
you're really worried about. So you know, lowering interest rates
right now probably doesn't do a whole heck of a
lot because you have to look at the rate that
basically Fed funds or the ten year rate where lots
(20:23):
of other instruments are priced off of, relative to inflation. Right,
So if the Fed funds rate it's at five and
a half percent and inflation still running at three point
four percent, the rate of two point one or whatever
is not that restrictive right now, So you think they
should I think they have to stay pat They are
worried about inflation becoming entrenched in the economy, and every
(20:46):
day is whether it's wages, whether it's you know, a
whole host of other input costs, you know, whether it
be shipping, whether it be energy, oil in the like here.
If it becomes entrenched in the economy the way it
did in the seventies, and you have lower than trend growth,
then you have something called stagflation, which you.
Speaker 3 (21:04):
And I have not heard a whole heckle a lot
about stagflation.
Speaker 1 (21:07):
Is the nightmare. Talk to us about stagflation.
Speaker 4 (21:10):
Right, And really, what that would mean is that these
higher prices become entrench in the economy. Companies have to
try to pass through those higher costs to consumers. Consumers
pull back in their spending, causing less than expected growth.
But then ultimately the consumer hits a wall. Corporations hit
a wall. They can't pass through prices anymore to their customers.
(21:31):
They start laying people off. And just remember we have
unemployment rate below four percent, that's still at a fifty
or fifty five year low, right, So then all of
a sudden you have unemployment start to tick up, right,
and so all of this is really a very negative
sort of cycle that can happen in the economy.
Speaker 3 (21:49):
Those are the sort of worst scenarios, and.
Speaker 1 (21:51):
That's what killed Carter.
Speaker 3 (21:53):
Correct.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
Stagflation is what killed Jimmy Carter, among other things, and
it is the nightmare scenario that was very hard to
get out of. And it seems very likely that we
will not hit into stagflation at this point.
Speaker 4 (22:06):
Well, I mean, who knows, you know, at this point.
And again, a lot of this might be messaging. If
you look at the way that Biden is polling on
the economy relative to a potential Trump administration, you know,
he's not doing particularly well despite the fact that they've
had a number of really you know, great legislative wins
as it relates to the economy.
Speaker 3 (22:24):
Think about the Chip sack and the like.
Speaker 1 (22:26):
Yeah, but I want you to pause back and talk
about stagflation for a minute. You know, Yes, the Biden
administration is not breaking through on messaging when it comes
to the economy. But I feel like I'm more curious
about what you think the Fed should do to kind
of pull us out of this, or do you think
it's better just a way.
Speaker 3 (22:45):
No, I think the Fed they're doing their job.
Speaker 4 (22:47):
They did the right thing by raising interest rates right
relative to the pace of inflation. And I think the
fact that they are not willing to kind of drop
the mic and put up a mission impossible sort of
sign makes a lot of sense right here, because if
the first three months of this year were any indication
you know, about the potential for a reflation right and
(23:09):
the disinflation of inflation, I know there was a.
Speaker 3 (23:11):
Lot there, Like that is what their big worry is.
Speaker 4 (23:14):
And so to me, keeping the rate high right has
the potential of slowing down the economy, which is essentially
what they want to do, right. They want to slower
the pace of jobs growth, They're starting to do that.
They want to slower the pace of consumption, they're starting
to do that, right, And so the idea of taking
their foot off the pedal right now, then you run
the risk of basically lowering interest rates causing inflation to
(23:37):
get going again, making you know, just kind of financial
conditions that much easier. And then you run the risk
of basically inflating a bubble in risk assets too. And
don't think for a second that the stock market, the
housing market don't play into this because the wealth effect
that created by the stock market at all time highs
and housing market, you know, at unusually high levels, you know,
(23:58):
creates this situation where you know, no one can see
an end in sight to risk asset inflation, and then
you run the risk of it popping like we had
in twenty twenty two and a bear market.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
So it really is a very delicate dance to try
to lower inflation for the consumer because you know, for
the people in the middle of the country, for whom
McDonald's is now, you know, twenty percent of the budget
as opposed to fifteen or whatever that looks like, and
not get into one of these really dangerous cycles. But
(24:33):
part of the fundamental problem with this economy is still
that it's too good.
Speaker 4 (24:37):
Yeah well, I mean, listen, you're going to hear this
term all this time hot on Financial TV. That is
a sort of Goldilock situation in a way. I mean,
corporate profits are doing very well. The ability to pass
through these price increases has been good for their margins
and good for profitability. But you know, just this morning,
this is Thursday morning, as we're recording it, Walmart's earnings
are out. The stock is at a new all time
(24:59):
high nearly six percent. The headline is Walmart sales surge
as wealthy shoppers flock to retailers. So think about that.
There's a trade down in the wealth level of their shoppers.
So people are starting to feel it. They're looking for value,
and those sorts of things have the ability to kind
of creep up and then have an effect, you know
(25:19):
what I mean on the economy all at once. You
have two thirds of our economy the GDP comes from
the consumer. So the warning signs are there that the
consumer is slowing at a time where unemployment is still
really low, and that sort of ingredient with high inflation
and high interest rates have the potential to cause an
economic downturn.
Speaker 3 (25:40):
You mentioned it.
Speaker 4 (25:40):
A lot of folks coming into twenty twenty three were
convinced that we were going to have a recession. We
never did. The FED was getting ready to ease policy,
but then inflation picked back up. And you know, we
haven't even mentioned geopolitics. And one of the biggest kickers
back in early twenty twenty two was when Russia invaded.
Speaker 1 (25:58):
Ukraine, right because of fuel.
Speaker 4 (26:00):
Right, and so fuel costs went up dramatically, and so
it also disrupted supply chains. So when you think about this,
one of the reasons why a lot of folks that
look at markets and look at the economy are really
concerned about the situation with China and Taiwan is that
another disruption to supply chains like we saw in COVID.
The national security risks of all of this centralized manufacturing
(26:22):
and supply chains dependent on China has the potential to
cause massive inflationary pressures, especially as we reshore jobs, whether
it be in semiconductors or other parts of manufacturing. And
the last point I'll just say, and this is bipartisan
because the Trump administration started this back in early in
their administration, the tariffs and the trade war. You know,
(26:42):
the Biden administration has leaned into this. We're seeing lots
of teriffs being placed on that's also inflationary, So let's talk.
Speaker 1 (26:49):
About the tariffs. This is one of the few times
ever that the Trump administration may have done something right,
which is baffling to me because of the more they
had running that hip and the advice they were taking
from people like Larry Goudlow, who is a lovely person
but is wrong about almost everything. So explain to us
why Trump World was right about tariffs when it comes
(27:12):
to China, and also just explain to me why inflationary
tariffs are somehow good now.
Speaker 3 (27:18):
They're really not. I mean.
Speaker 4 (27:19):
So the point is, I think a lot of it
has to do with diversification away from those supply chains
in China, and also the idea and we've been dealing
with this in the US as it relates to manufacturing
for fifty years. You know, Japan was the bugaboo back
in the eighties that they were going to dump cars
on us and destroy Detroit, and to some degree they
really did. Right now, as you think about the bideninistration
(27:42):
and what they're doing, I mean, they want to be
very pro Detroit auto manufacturing. And we saw that earlier
in the year with the UAW strikes when Biden went
and got on the picket line. Right now, that serves
him politically very well, right to have a very strong
message message in Michigan. It's one of the only battle
ground states that he's doing pretty decently. And so the
(28:03):
idea that the Chinese, which have gotten really good at
developing low cost electric vehicles, that they could be selling
them here in the US. It would absolutely sink Tesla,
which is the leader right now in high end electric vehicles.
Elon Musk has wind about it on many occasions that
the Chinese have the potential just to destroy USV manufacturing.
Speaker 3 (28:25):
So he's right about that.
Speaker 4 (28:27):
But really, if you think about the number of cars
that are coming out of Detroit that are fully electric,
I think it was basically one percent of the fifteen
million cars that were made and shipped in America last year,
one hundred and fifty thousand I think between Ford and GM.
Speaker 3 (28:43):
So this is a very nascent industry here in the US.
Speaker 4 (28:46):
I think a lot of folks who are really focused
on this from a environmental standpoint would like to see,
let's say, the Chinese innovation help basically spur competition here
in the US, which will give many, many more consumers
access to these vehicles. And if these ariffs at one
hundred percent coming in from China are basically going to
(29:06):
block US consumers from buying cheap Chinese EV's, but I
just don't think there's demand for cheap Chinese.
Speaker 3 (29:11):
Evs anyway here.
Speaker 4 (29:12):
But again that's the risk, and they're also putting them
on steel and a whole host of other things. And
again going back to the Trump administration, you know that
wasn't that popular if you think about it back at
the time on certain forms of manufacturing companies because they
rely on that cheap steel and they lost a lot
of jobs in the heartland because of those high terraffs.
Speaker 1 (29:33):
Right. So, do you think ultimately the Trump world was
wrong and Biden world is wrong?
Speaker 3 (29:38):
No, I think they were probably right.
Speaker 4 (29:40):
If you think about this sort of deal that the
US manufacturing had made that benefited US consumers some fifty
years ago. You know, we got addicted to cheap manufactured
goods in China, but at the hollowing out of our
manufacturing capabilities has done a number on our economy if
you think about it, right, And so I think they
(30:00):
were probably right in some manners. I think the Biden
administration basically left all those tariffs in place, and now
we're getting a bit more aggressive. You know, again, a
lot of it is messaging, right, and how you want
to play in this global you know playing field. I mean,
the Trump administration they basically went after very hard, you know,
China and some other parts of the world, and that
(30:22):
was you know, basically one of their big economic messages,
and for many reasons it's right. But the other thing
I'll just say is that, you know, if you think
about twenty and sixteen to twenty and twenty four, what
is starting to become very apparent is China is much
weaker than we would have given them any credit for.
Speaker 3 (30:40):
You know, than a few years ago.
Speaker 4 (30:41):
They have a massive demographic problem, they have huge economic
problems that have not really made it to our shores
just yet, and so maybe they're not the sort of
you know adversary economically that we think they are. And therefore,
you know, the idea of kind of pressing their neck
right now may cause them to do something that we
don't want them to do on the geopolitical front, and
(31:02):
that is some sort of you know, embargo on Taiwan
or as trying to take Taiwan, because that would be
something that I think would be disasterus if you thought
the Ukraine invasion was bad for all the things we
just talked about, you know, cutting off access to chips
and by the way, Taiwan makes probably eighty five percent
of high end chips right now, they're distributed all over
(31:24):
the world.
Speaker 3 (31:24):
That would be a very bad thing for the global economy.
Speaker 1 (31:27):
Yeah, these are all really really salient and important points.
And China is both not as strong as we worry
they are, but also way more dangerous than Russia ultimately
because they have money and they have real stuff. I
want you just for a second to talk about there
are people on the left. They're like the politicians that
(31:49):
my husband hates, but I like them ideologically, But he
hates them because he's a venture capitalist and he's the best,
but I think he's wrong on this. But they want
to push to lower gross prices. I'm talking about Elizabeth Warren,
I'm talking about Bernie Sanders. This is like capitalist creates
a lot of capitalist anxiety. I mean, is there a
place for.
Speaker 3 (32:08):
That or now? Not really?
Speaker 4 (32:10):
I mean, you know, when you think about it, past
administrations they've looked for different ways to kind of you know,
like through the social safety net to kind of, you know,
help reduce the cost of some of these things. But
at the end of the day, you know, we really
don't have mechanisms in our capitalistic kind of.
Speaker 3 (32:25):
Way of life to do that, right.
Speaker 4 (32:27):
And so again this comes down to the sort of
choices that you make and the parties that you align with,
and you know, the Democratic Party, whether it be the
far left coming up with these sorts of plans, it's
kind of helping move the center to the left, I
think a little bit if that makes some sense on
some of these issues that I know you and I
and your husband care deeply about. But the way in
which people want to institute these policies are very different. Right,
(32:49):
So when I think about this, one of the major
differences that I always consider when I think about some
of let's say, the economic policies on the right that
make some sense to me more so than say coming
out of Bernie and Elizabeth Warren. I mean, what I
care about is that our tax dollars go to the
most vulnerable in some ways, to some of the most
vulnerable citizens in our country. And I think on the
right they think of them as handouts, right, And so
(33:12):
to me, that's where just I just like draw the
line to some degree. So again, I don't agree with
Bernie and Elizabeth Warren, but I do believe that the
Democratic Party, and I think the things that they stand
for as it relates to the social safety that are
worth fighting for.
Speaker 3 (33:26):
And that's where I stand.
Speaker 1 (33:27):
Thank you, Dan, You're the best, all.
Speaker 3 (33:30):
Right, Olli, John Fast, It's always a plusure.
Speaker 1 (33:34):
Jacob Rubashkan is an analyst and reporter for Inside Elections.
Welcome back to Fast Politics, Jacob Rubashkan.
Speaker 5 (33:42):
Thank you so much for having me.
Speaker 1 (33:44):
So let's talk about what the landscape looks like in
twenty twenty four.
Speaker 5 (33:50):
Yeah, leak for Democrats on the Senate side at least.
Speaker 1 (33:53):
First, let's talk about the Senate map. Primaries went basically
as good as they could for Democrats, right, Yeah.
Speaker 5 (34:02):
I think in the places where Democrats needed wins, they
got them. They got the candidates they preferred and some
of the tougher races, and obviously Democrats one thing that
they have going for them is that they don't have
very many primaries themselves, right. I Mean, it's almost entirely
incumbents or people without primaries. Maryland was really kind of
the big competitive race that also had a competitive primary,
(34:24):
was a standout in that regard.
Speaker 1 (34:27):
So let's talk about that. I feel like black women
candidates have kind of gotten screwed, especially when it comes
to Senate. We've only had three black women senators, which
is insanity. But it looks like that's possibly about to.
Speaker 5 (34:40):
Change, right, Yeah, No, I think that it will most
likely change. There are two black women who are poised
to win their Senate races this cycle. I mean, Lisa
Blunt Rochester in Delaware is basically a shoe in. She
doesn't face any real opposition in her primary or in
the general election, so she's going to be there next year.
And Angela also Brooks in Maryland. I think we still
(35:02):
consider her the favorite to win the Maryland Senate race,
even against Larry Hogan. It'll be a tough contest, but
we see her favorite, and she would be of course,
the other black women in the Senate, they would go
from zero to two, and two is more than they've
ever had at the same time in the Senate in history.
Speaker 1 (35:20):
We have a black woman senator from California right now,
but she's about to be replaced by a white man. Yes,
let's just game this out. There's a slate of really
bad polls that show a lot of stuff. But if
we were just to go on twenty twenty two, or
even twenty twenty three, or even twenty twenty all of
(35:41):
the elections where Democrats have overperformed, and you were to
be a little optimistic, what Senate seats. Do you think
Democrats can either keep or pick up.
Speaker 5 (35:51):
Look, I think that in the best case scenario for Democrats,
they hold everything except West Virginia. I mean, West Virginia
is off the board. I don't even talk about it
anymore because it's so out of mind. Without Joe Manchin,
that seat is gone and that up ends the whole math.
But we'll leave that aside for a second. I think
there are paths to victory for both John Tester and
(36:11):
Montana and Sheared Brown in Ohio. Those are the two
most vulnerable seats, but it's not West Virginia territory. They're
not being triaged, they're not dead men walking.
Speaker 1 (36:20):
And they are also amazing candidates that are pretty different.
You know, those candidates are amazing candidates.
Speaker 5 (36:29):
And this is something that Democrats have going for them,
is though they brought back almost all of their incumbents,
and that really makes a difference. A lot of the
time when we see big swings in Senate composition, it
is because incumbents decide not to run for reelection. I mean,
think about twenty fourteen, which I think is still kind
of If you're trying to understand why Democrats have been
(36:50):
such a deep hole in the Senate for so long.
Twenty fourteen is the year that you have to look to.
Republicans flipped nine seats that year. It was a blood
bat and it was in part because they had they
want a bunch of really narrow victories in states against
incumbents like North Carolina and Alaska, but also because Parkin
retired in Iowa, and you had other Democratic senators in
(37:13):
Republican states who didn't even bother trying to win reelection.
They just hung up the cleats and went home. And
I think what is keeping Democratic hopes alive is that
neither John Tester nor Shared Brown made that calculation. This time,
they're giving the party a fighting chance in both of
those states.
Speaker 1 (37:30):
Let's talk about here's one that because I'm still very
salty from twenty twenty two and the fucking Wisconsin Senate
where Ron Annon was polling nine points ahead and won
against Mandela Barns by one point. If you were looking
(37:51):
at this map, what would be that seed?
Speaker 5 (37:53):
So this one we actually see in a better position
for Democrats than most of their other vulnerable seats.
Speaker 1 (38:02):
What are we we're talking about Tavy Baldwin in Wisconsin. Yeah, yeah,
she's gonna win. That guy's an asshole, sorry, Eric Coovey,
and who comes from California owns a bank.
Speaker 5 (38:13):
The matchup there, I think generally plays well to Senator
Baldwin's strength. Huv D Eric hove.
Speaker 1 (38:19):
D with a ridiculous little mustache.
Speaker 5 (38:22):
He ran for senate in twenty twelve Sands mustache didn't
even win the primary, so the mustache at least has
helped him clear the primary field this time, right or Ormon.
What he has going for him is he is really
really rich, and he unlike some really rich guys who
run for office and don't spend any money or spend
a little bit of money, he really is is opening
(38:45):
up his checkbook and has already been able to go
up on TV and prosecute a message against Senator Baldwin.
But you know, he's got the baggage too, He's got
the California stuff. He has a pension for speaking his
mind in somewhat blunt ways that doesn't sit well with voters.
I mean, he made those comments about how people in
(39:07):
nursing homes might not you know, have the faculties to
be able to vote.
Speaker 1 (39:10):
Insulting old people is always a good way when you're
running for office, always a good moment.
Speaker 5 (39:15):
And you know, in Wisconsin, he made a comment if
I had to start all over, I would say we
shouldn't have legal alcohol sales. He presents some opportunities to
Democrats to paint him as kind of an out of
touch rich guy who's not in it or the people
of Wisconsin. And that's why, you know, I think that
we see Senator Baldwin in a stronger position than either
(39:37):
Shared Brown or John Tester, but also Jackie Rosen in
Nevada and Bob Casey and Pennsylvania and some of these
other candidates as well. You know, Wisconsin I think is
in a better spot for Democrats than a lot of
these other highly competitive Senate races.
Speaker 1 (39:51):
Talk to me about the Senate race that's not on
the map but maybe should be.
Speaker 5 (39:56):
I mean, I think both parties have arguments to make
for one or two states that we don't currently see
as super competitive. On the Democratic side, I think Florida
is the obvious candidate here at the moment, we have
Florida rated solid Republican because it's just not clear that
the likely nominee there. Former Congresswoman w macarstole Powell is
(40:18):
going to be able to stand up the kind of
operation needed to run in the third largest state in
the Union. I mean, Florida is incredibly expensive and she
is not such an incredible fundraiser compared to some of
these other Democrats.
Speaker 1 (40:32):
And he's got a gazillion dollars.
Speaker 5 (40:34):
And he's got a gazillion dollars and he will spend it.
I mean, he spent sixty million on his run in
twenty eighteen. Money is no problem for him. And because
the Biden campaign probably isn't going to invest heavily in Florida,
she's going to have to do it on her own.
And we just at the moment, it doesn't seem like
that is going to happen. It's not going to all
(40:55):
come together for her. And you know, the Florida Democratic
Party has really been struggled in recent years to build
up any kind of infrastructure at a state level, and
so it's difficult. But if things really get better for Biden,
if all of a sudden he's competitive in Florida and
she's able to really kick her fundraising into high gear,
then yeah, Rick Scott has never won a race by
more than one percentage point in the decade he's been
(41:17):
in politics. On paper, this is a seat that could
come online for Democrats on the Republican side. The one
or two that I think they would probably want to
make a run at, or New Mexico or Virginia. I'd
probably place New Mexico above that, just because you know,
this is a state that used to be.
Speaker 1 (41:34):
Because of the Hispanic poll and vote at the polls.
Speaker 5 (41:38):
So New Mexico has the highest Hispanic population I believe
of any state in the country. Republicans have a recruit
in that state that they like, Nela Dimnici. She's the
daughter of former Senator Pete Domenici, so she's got some
built in name id. She is wealthy, and so she
has some self funding capacity. And Martin Heinrich, the incumbent Democrat,
is not a particularly flashy member. He's not on TV
(42:00):
all the time. He's not kind of a high profile
member of the caucus, which can cut both ways. But
I think it might give Republicans an opportunity to define
him a little bit in voters' minds. But New Mexico
is not going to be a competitive presidential state unless
the bottom falls out for Biden, right, So like you
kind of have these extremes on either side. Depending on
where the presidential race goes, we could see one or
(42:22):
the other be competitive.
Speaker 1 (42:23):
Yeah, seems unlikely. So talk to me about the House.
Speaker 5 (42:28):
So the House is definitely a more positive territory for
Democrats than the Senate is. I mean, the Senate is
truly almost entirely defense. That's not a comfortable position to
be the House. Of course, they're in the minority right now,
so by definition they have more room to grow, and
they have room to grow in Democratic leaning territory. There
are a handful of seats in California and New York
(42:50):
that Biden would have carried by double digits last cycle
that Democrats absolutely have to win back if they want
to flip control of the House. I mean, that is
the main path to the majority, and then kind of
everything else. The other seats out there, and there are
probably another fifteen seats that are conceivably targetable on Democratic
side and on Republican side. That'll determine how big the
(43:12):
majority is for either party. But it's going to come
down to those seats in the middle. If Democrats want
to retake control redistricting, there were a couple of states
that redrew their maps. Ultimately, it looks like pretty much
a wash. Republicans are going to pick up a couple
seats out of North Carolina, but Democrats are going to
pick up a seat in Alabama and a seat in Louisiana.
(43:35):
So you know, call it R plus one. But you
know that's the kind of number that comes out in
the wash. It's not really a major upending of the
congressional map from last year to this year at least.
Speaker 1 (43:47):
So what seats are you in the House? What do
you think has promised for Democrats? Where do you think
they can flow?
Speaker 5 (43:56):
So, look, there are two seats on Long Island that
Democrats are interested in, the first district in the fourth district.
I think the fourth district is that one of the
number one pick up opportunities. Maybe number one would have
voted for Biden.
Speaker 1 (44:11):
Who is that?
Speaker 5 (44:12):
That's Congressman Anthony des Posito.
Speaker 1 (44:14):
Oh yeah, yeah, that's the one that John Avlon is
running for.
Speaker 5 (44:18):
Right, No, So he's running in the first district, which
is Nick Loloda.
Speaker 1 (44:22):
Who's ds Posito running in.
Speaker 5 (44:24):
So d s Posito is running against Laura Gillen, who
is the former Hempstead Town Supervisor. She ran against him
last cycle two and lost by like two points or
something like that, and she's back for the rematch. And
so that you know, that district voted for Biden by
a greater margin than any other seat currently held by
a Republican. So that's certainly top of the list. And
(44:47):
then you kind of go up through the Hudson Valley
New York seventeen with Mike Lawler running against Mandair Jones.
That's going to be a big race. And then the
twenty second district, I think is actually probably a Democrat's
best shot anywhere of flipping a seat.
Speaker 2 (45:02):
What is that?
Speaker 5 (45:02):
So that's Brandon Williams is the Republican. He's a freshman.
It's kind of a Syracuse based on Indaga County district.
There's a Democratic primary there currently going on for the
next couple of weeks. They've got to sort that out.
But then Williams is very vulnerable. He is more conservative
than the district typically goes for, so we actually see
(45:24):
him as like the most vulnerable Republican in the country
right now.
Speaker 1 (45:28):
Oh wow, And then what about on this now it's
in California.
Speaker 5 (45:31):
Yeah, so there are a couple of seats in kind
of the La Orange County area that are going to
be very crucial. So Mike Garcia in California's twenty seventh district.
This is kind of Antelope Valley. It's on the other
side of LA from the Palm Springs District. There is
a Palm Springs district as well that's going to be competitive.
Will Rollins is the Democrat there.
Speaker 1 (45:52):
Yeah, we've had him on a number of times.
Speaker 5 (45:54):
Yeah, running against Ken Calvert, So that's going to be
a tough race. Rollins isn't very strong fundraiser. I think
he's probably one of the best fundraisers that Democrats have
on the challenger side this cycle. But you know those
two races, there's the Michelle Steele seat, which is California's
forty fifth district, is going to be competitive, and then
(46:15):
there are two seats in the Central Valley. Adam Gray
is running against Congressman John Duarti in the thirteenth district,
and that was a race that both of those guys
ran last time. Duarte beat him, but I want to say,
like five hundred votes. It was very narrow.
Speaker 3 (46:31):
It was like this.
Speaker 5 (46:32):
It was the second narrowest after Adam Frisch. It was
the second narrowest race in the country. And then David
Valdeo is also in that area, another seat that would
have voted for Biden by a lot and is represented
by a Republican, and he's also in a rematch against
Rudy Sallis, who's a former state assembly man who's back
for another shot at the seat. So a number of
(46:54):
rematches in California and other highly competitive races that will
also determine and whether Democrats can win back these seats.
I mean, if they're not able to win back seats
that Biden was carrying by ten plus points.
Speaker 1 (47:08):
Right right, right, that's real weird. So let me ask you,
is Lauren Bobert safe?
Speaker 2 (47:14):
Now?
Speaker 1 (47:14):
Talk to us about the sort of crazies like the
Matt Gates, the Anna Paulina Luna bad Crow, the Arson s.
Speaker 5 (47:23):
Lauren Bobert is an interesting one because she made that
district jump. Right, if she had remained in her current district,
she'd be very vulnerable. I think she knew that. That's
why she drove across the state. Right we were talking
hundreds of miles from the third district to the fourth
district to try and run in a very crowded Republican
primary in a safe seat. Now she's got to win
her primary, which is going to be tough. When is
(47:45):
the primary it's coming up? I want to say June
twenty fifth is the Colorado primary, and you know, if
she can win her primary, then she'll be set, you know,
for however long she wants, until you know, if they
redraw the district in a decade or whatever. But that's
a very solid Republican district. Matt Gates similar story. I mean,
that's the Florida Panhandle is among the most Republican places
(48:08):
in the country at this point. Marjorie Taylor Green Northeast
Northwest Georgia is you know, that's Republican country. And a
Paulina Luna is an interesting one because that district on
paper is a little swing yer kind of that Saint
Petersburg Tampa Bay area. Charlie crist held that seat for
a while. There is a crowded Democratic primary there, which
(48:29):
I'm kind of surprised by because it's not a top
tier opportunity, but you've got four or five Democrats running
credible campaigns trying to get the nomination there. I think
that if we see some sort of snap back for
Democrats in Florida. That's the one seat that could be
competitive in the entire state. You know, pretty incredible. Almost
thirty congressional districts in this state, and at most one
(48:51):
or two of them would conceivably flip. They did a
very good job of gerrymandering that state when they redraw
the maps last cycle. But she's a kind of that
caucus that Austin Kevin McCarthy and has been causing so
much trouble for Republican leadership. She's the one who comes
from the swingiest district by far.
Speaker 1 (49:11):
Yeah, that's so interesting. Thank you so much. Jacob Robashkan, Yeah,
powis a pleasure. No sick, Jesse Cannon.
Speaker 6 (49:23):
My junk fast. You know, we all know that Trump
gets compared to a mob boss a lot, but trickling
down what all the people below him should say really
puts a fine note on it.
Speaker 1 (49:35):
New York Magazine journalist Andrew Rice said he saw as
he was sitting in the courtroom, Donald Trump editing what
he was going to have his surrogate say, getting around
the gag order, having them malign the judge and his
daughter during his criminal trial while his former lawyer and fixer,
(49:57):
Michael Cohen testifies about his hush money payments to an
adult film star. That, my friends, is our moment of U.
Speaker 3 (50:07):
Right.
Speaker 1 (50:09):
That's it for this episode of Fast Politics. Tune in
every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday to hear the best minds
in politics makes sense of all this chaos. If you
enjoyed what you've heard, please send it to a friend
and keep the conversation going. And again, thanks for listening.
Hi, I'm Molly John Fast and this is Fast Politics
where we discuss the top political headlines with some of
today's best minds. And the North Carolina Senate has banned
wearing masks in public places. We have such a great
show for you today. On the tape podcast, Dan Nathan
talks to us about the new economic numbers and what
(00:22):
we can expect from the US economy in the coming months.
Then we'll talk to Inside Elections Jacob Rubashkin about the
races that will determine what our government looks like in
twenty twenty five. But first we have the host of
the Time of Monsters the Nations ged here. Welcome back
(00:43):
to Fast Politics, ged.
Speaker 2 (00:45):
Here, and good to be back.
Speaker 1 (00:48):
Let's talk about it. It's Supreme Court season aka watching
six lunatics remake our federal government in the image of
the Koch Brothers.
Speaker 2 (01:00):
Discuss actually like today, there was a little bit of
good news because there was the kind of fear that
the courts would follow the attempt of the Fifth Circuit
to basically run their like large price of the government
illegal and then return America the glory days of child labor.
Speaker 1 (01:16):
That's still on the agenda.
Speaker 2 (01:18):
But they decided today. It was out that day, So
what is grateful for whatever small verses by can offer us,
that's a more positive sign. What were the other cases?
Speaker 1 (01:27):
There are more cases coming. I want you to sort
of talk us through. You wrote this piece about the
anti war movement needing to claim its victories, So talk
to us about what that means, because I do think
there's been a really interesting shift in American life when
it comes to being against foreign wars.
Speaker 2 (01:48):
Well, yeah, that's actually absolutely a really good point. But
I think on the current stuff, a lot of people
are very mad at Biden, and I'm one of them.
Support of what ness Hiwu's governments has been doing has
been above and beyond is a con for like many months,
and he should have acted earlier, but it is all
the more striking considering who he is and his history
on this issue. He is taking steps that no previous
(02:08):
American president has in terms of cutting back on sending
weapons now, so leaving this ideal should have happened sooner.
It is happening, and I don't think it would have
happened if it weren't for you know, the protests that
we're seeing not just on campuses, but earlier the end
committed move in. So I think Biden realizes this coalition
isn't behind him on this. And the polling is quite striking.
(02:30):
I mean, this majority close to the Israeli war in Gaza,
but it's a super majority among Democrats. People voted for
Biden in twenty twenty. You're looking at like, you know,
depending on the poll, seventy seventy five percent of post
the anti war movement deserves credit and they should push on.
I think that what he want to hear is among
some people is almost self sabotage of like oh, you know,
(02:52):
like it's so tiny, he doesn't really read it. He's
going to reverse it. And the attitude, well it's too little,
too late, as he like an an ongoing political moment.
Like I think that's the wrong attitude. I think you
have to say, like, okay, this guy is starting to
listen to us, something that Donald Trump would never do.
By the way, and of course we got to push
him more. We've got to push him far there. We're
not gonna like relent on pushing him, but he has
(03:15):
moving forward, and we have to like, you know, create
an incentive structure so that Biden knows that you know,
if he wants to get the approval. He's getting some approval.
Now you'll get even more if he goes further. My
piece of really criticizing the sort of self sabotage of
people within the movement that are like trying to deny
the significance of what we're seeing, because I actually do
think it's it's pretty significant where Biden is going, and
(03:36):
I think we're probably gonna see more of that, and
I would have I think, you know, beyond Biden, like
there's a lot of indication that people in the broader administration,
include the State devironment, aren't very happy with what Israel
is doing. You know, I think what has to reach
out to those people and create conditions where they feel
emboldened to speak out it and they feel embolded.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
That but there was a real aggressive when today on marijuana.
Will you talk a.
Speaker 2 (04:03):
Little bit about that again, This is something actually somebody's
very related to, like Israel, in the sense of like,
you know, there's something that I might feel like, well,
Biden is done is a little bit earlier. There's a
little bit people have been pushing him to do for
like a long time. I think Biden's history and who
he is is maybe pertinent to this. It's maybe not
something that comes natural to him for like a bunch
(04:25):
of reasons, including I think personal reasons. Having said that,
he is someone who can be pushed, he's something someone
who can be moved, And to me, like that's the
most pertinent political lesson to be learned from this.
Speaker 1 (04:37):
Yeah, I think so too. And I actually think like
we've seen this with other things in Biden world, where
he sort of makes this choice to do the more
progressive thing, and it's quite cool. I mean with the
marijuana staff, that's something that pretty much across the board
people really support and could be meaningful in all sorts
(05:00):
of ways.
Speaker 2 (05:01):
Oh no, absolutely no, it's gonna like materially make people's
lives better. It is something that has like super majority
of support. And I have to ask myself, you know
where the popular stat you know, like there's a whole
wing of these sort of Savai political consultants and strategists.
He were saying, Yo, we have to do the popular thing.
This is like doing the popular thing, although they were
(05:22):
for some weird reason, they never foregrounded this issue as
one of the popular things to do. I will also
mention a lot of the student dead reliefs that we've
been seeing. The only thing I would maybe say is,
you know, I'd like to see the White House get
a little bit more on front on some of this stuff,
where to maybe call us this more into like a
message of like see what we're doing. And for whatever reason,
(05:43):
like that little bit is not quite coalescing, although that
could change, is you know, the election heats up here.
Speaker 1 (05:49):
We are, we're ten thousand days from this election. We're
all gonna die. All anyone talks about is freaking out
about out this whole thing. Jesse just said, one hundred
and seventy three days. No, Jesse, it's ten thousand days.
Give us a little good news.
Speaker 2 (06:09):
Well, actually, I think like even in some of the
bad news people are reporting, I think there is a
kind of good news because I noticed that, like all,
you know, like there were some polls showing Biden is
behind in the swing stage, but those same polls show
that the actually Democratic candidates for the Senate in those
places are doing well and are overperforming Biden. Now, if
(06:30):
you think about it, like are there really people that
are going to in vast numbers vote for a Democratic
senatorial candidate and.
Speaker 1 (06:38):
Leave the top of the ticket blank.
Speaker 2 (06:39):
It seems crazy, Yeah, are going to vote for Biden?
Speaker 3 (06:43):
I don't really know.
Speaker 1 (06:43):
We want Trump, yeah exactly.
Speaker 2 (06:45):
So I actually think that what those polling shows is
I think, like the Democratic agenda is popular. You know,
that's congruent with what we saw in the mid terms
and what we've seen in special elections, and that a
lot of the poor polling that Biden's having, it's just
people registering their dissatisfaction, Like they're gonna vote for Biden,
but they don't want to say so right now because
(07:06):
they're mad at him. We're disappointed them for various reasons.
So I actually think, if you know, if I don't
encourage anyone to be obsessed with the polls at all.
Speaker 1 (07:13):
Especially one hundred and seventy three days aft.
Speaker 2 (07:17):
Yeah, but if you are like actually like look at
the fact that, hey, you know, like the Democratic Party
is in good shape, and ask to yourself, if the
party is in good shape, what is the likely results
for the top figure. The other I think kind of
good news is like the debate stuff, which I thought
was a really smart move.
Speaker 1 (07:34):
I hear you're free on Wednesdays.
Speaker 2 (07:37):
You know, they're going to have fairly early debates. I think,
contrary to popular wisdom, Biden does well and then Trump
as he does poorly. And I actually think that fairly
early on the starkness of the choice between Biden and
Trump is going to become a parent and I think
that's actually going to start narrowing this thing and solidifying. You. Yeah,
I actually think like overall, you know, I don't. I
(07:58):
would not say people should be terrified. I think that
it's going to be like a tight election. People are
gonna have to pull things together.
Speaker 1 (08:05):
You'd rather be the Dems than the Republicans, I think so. Yes,
Donald Trump sits in a courthouse right now.
Speaker 2 (08:12):
Yeah, well, I mean that's the other thing. But you know,
we've seen the Republicans embrace of Trump, and I think
that's come with some political costs. But like the extent
that they're embracing him now, not just that Trump's in
the courthouse, but like all these party leaders are joining
him the courthouse and are joining him to like insult
the judge.
Speaker 1 (08:29):
I think that hurts him. I think it hurts the
party if you want to keep the House.
Speaker 2 (08:33):
And yeah, ways, I don't think we can measure yet,
but I think that, you know, the full extent that
they've embraced not just Trump, but Trump's criminality, that's going
to have a lasting legacy. I mean I think, like,
you know, like January sixth had a lasting legacy, and
that's why the Dems overperformed in the rich terms. And
like this is like, you know, this is kind of
a variation on January sixth. It's an open defiance of
(08:55):
the rule of law. And I think there's a lot
of people, you know, might not agree with the Dems
on all political things, but they kind of understand the
United States has to be like a nation of laws,
and like what Trump is doing now it's like you're
staring into the abyss of being like, you know, like
let's go to court anarchy, you know.
Speaker 1 (09:12):
So let's talk about Donald Trump in court. Right now,
his former lawyer is being cross examined by his current lawyer,
Todd Blande, who is a prosecutor. I mean, this is
this weird moment in Trump world where Trump has actually
gotten pretty good lawyers and now he's making them be
bad lawyers by bossing them around.
Speaker 2 (09:34):
Yeah, I do mean this is one reason why usually
he has bad lawyers because they're the ones that put
up with it. Oh, I mean it's interesting. I've thought
about this a little bit, Like it is interesting that
the one place you can get good lawyers is in
a kind of criminal case. That's maybe because he's more
used to like that kind of legal scenario than he
is with some of the more issues of constitutional law
(09:58):
or election law, that he's deafliped with this kind of
case involving you know, sort of mafio. So like kickbacks
and favors is Donald Trump's terrain. But having said that, like, yeah,
I'm not super optimistic about this as a legal case,
Like I think it's actually kind of hard to draw
these ways in which they can attack the witnesses.
Speaker 1 (10:16):
It's a little hanky.
Speaker 3 (10:18):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (10:18):
Yeah. But having said that, I mean, like, you know,
if anyone's gonna sabotage a legal case.
Speaker 1 (10:24):
It's going to be Donald Trump, right, It's true.
Speaker 2 (10:27):
Oh yeah, yeah, no, I you know, his recording court
has left been that great. I mean you have, especially
what considers all the court cases that were brought coming
out of the twenty twenty election. So yeah, I actually
think it's kind of been fascinating to watch and maybe
the root of all this is that he's always felt
he's been about the law, and unfortunately for most of
(10:47):
his life he's been right. Like, how many things has
this guy done that are like, you know, borderline criminal
or criminal that we're never brought up, we'll never know.
It's a lot and this sense of impunity. I can
do what I want, I can the judges. That's really
a product of a lifetime. But have you said that.
I think very ordinary people watching this stuff, you know,
like I can't feel that they would be very sepulate
(11:08):
to Trump. And I think that, you know, there's like
this fundamental attack on the rule of law, not just
why what he did criminally, but by the attacks on
the judges and the political attacks. I think that's going
to resonate.
Speaker 1 (11:19):
Yeah, you know, I think so much about how he
thinks he's doing something brilliant here by making this case
about law and not about his criminality, and like it's
worked for him with the primary voters, who are so
predisposed to him that they'll pretty much go along with anything.
(11:39):
But I'm not convinced that you can win anyone else
who doesn't have total Trump derangement syndrome.
Speaker 2 (11:46):
Yeah, I know, I think that's right. I think that
he's decided to make it in a way that people
have to choose, like, you know, do they go into
the Trump culture or do they like go along with
the normal reality that they've lived in their own life.
That's helped win the primaries, is not people that were
already in the Trump call that if that's the choice,
then he wins. But like if you're putting into the
broader public, no, I don't think he wins. And in fact,
(12:08):
I think it will remind people why they don't like him,
which I think is actually very important. I think, like,
you know, he's been out of the spot like long
enough that some people have forgotten. Maybe it's start the
big takeaway of the court cases, Like it's a big
reminder of why you do not want this guy that
I does. You know, why he's a bad and dangerous fan.
Speaker 1 (12:26):
Yeah, but it is interesting to see members of Congress,
the Speaker of the United States has representatives people for
whom they should know better up there being like this
is our guy.
Speaker 3 (12:40):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (12:41):
No, you know what it reminded me of, Like as
a New Yorker, you'll remember mister Gotti, well respected businessman,
a member of the community and was a very stricting thing.
That's like, you know, because he was a bobster with
as certain support in the community, there were people who
rallied to him. She's like, this is very similar, except that,
(13:01):
you know, like it's not just like a small community
in New York. It's like the weight of like, you know,
one of the two major political parties on one level. Like,
to me, this is the threat, right, the threat of
a trump pized Republican party that shares his contempt for law.
And that's a scary thing. But I think that's also
something Joe Biden can run on. Everything is already in
(13:24):
very stark relief, and one of the things Democrats have
to do is to just make sure everyone in America
knows this is the choice.
Speaker 1 (13:31):
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, no, I agree, a really good point.
Let's talk about Eric Adams for two minutes. Sure, he's
our mayor in New York whatever. He was recently in
Rome with the Pope. Can you just make it make sense?
Speaker 2 (13:47):
Well, I guess Eric Addam likes to see himself as
an international figure. I mean it is a kind of
perhaps charming thing. I actually remember, like he's running for Rayre.
He said that he had wanted to be buried in Israel,
and people asked where, and he said the goal at Heights,
which is actually disputed territory, or is actually Syrian territory.
(14:08):
So I guess New York has a very international mayor.
But perhaps the other thing is, like, you know what,
you're as widely hated as Eric Adams is, having so
much trouble domestically, maybe you go abroad. That's what sort
of presidents who are trouble often do. It happens that
I guess if you're aware of New York, you can
do the same thing exactly.
Speaker 1 (14:28):
Jesus Christ, Thank you jet here, thank you Spring is here.
And I bet you are trying to look fashionable, So
why not pick up some fashionable all new Fast Politics merchandise.
We just opened a news store with all new designs
(14:49):
just for you. Get t shirts, hoodies, hats, and top bags.
To grab some, head to Fastpolitics dot com. Dan Nathan
is the host of the On the Tape podcast and
a c NBC Fast Money contributor.
Speaker 3 (15:04):
Dan Nathan my John Cast.
Speaker 1 (15:08):
Welcome. I am so happy to have you here. You
know you're like one of my people.
Speaker 4 (15:13):
Well you know you're one of my must listens to
three times a week on Fast Politics. So it is
my sincere pleasure to be on with you this week.
Speaker 1 (15:21):
So let us talk about all of the economic news yesterday,
because there was a lot on Wednesday. We had like
a number of numbers. So explain to us what all
those numbers were, sort of break it down for us.
Speaker 3 (15:36):
All right, let's do it, okay, So listen.
Speaker 4 (15:37):
You know, I'm mostly focused on the markets, and a
lot of this economic data that comes out almost every
day is important to how investors perceive the health of
the economy, and thus they expressed those views in the markets,
whether it be the stock market, whether they be the
bond market, commodities and a like. So yesterday was the
April CPI reading, that's the main reading for inflation. It
(15:58):
came in slightly below expectations, but it's still up three
point four percent year over year, right, And you could say, well,
that's good, because I remember a year and a half
ago those inflation readings were coming in north of nine
percent or so.
Speaker 3 (16:11):
But here's the problem. Disinflation.
Speaker 4 (16:13):
While it's great for you know, most consumers, it's still
really bad for a lot of consumers. So at three
point four percent. That is up year over year, right,
so if you're spending on a whole host of things,
it's still up. It's down from the highs, you know,
almost two years ago, but it's still up. There was
also some data out there on retail sales which were
weaker than expected. So the longer that you have periods
(16:36):
of high inflation, right sooner or later, it's going to
weigh on consumer confidence and retail sales. And that's what
we're seeing here a little bit. And we also have
the Federal Reserve Chairman Powell was out earlier in the
week basically saying that interest rates are going to remain
higher for probably a little longer than they had expected
because they're still trying to battle high levels of inflation
(16:58):
with high interest rates, which is also weighing on a
certain set of consumers that use basically credit to finance
a whole host of different purchases.
Speaker 1 (17:07):
And also people want to buy houses. I mean, the
fundamental problem here, I feel like is we're in a
kind of mobi a strip which is high inflation makes
interest rates higher. High interest rates makes it impossible to
buy a house. Air go, you have housing being more expensive.
(17:28):
The only way to get that number down is probably
to cut interest rates.
Speaker 4 (17:32):
Well, yeah, and if they start to cut interest rates
too early, you run the risk of basically inflation heating
back up again. So it is a bit of a
conundrum that the Federal Reserve has right now. There are
massive political implications for this. You know, a lot of
folks think that if the Fed could just kind of
wave their wand in lower interest rates, that that's going
to help a certain sort of consumer here. But the
(17:54):
truth is it might cause oil to go back higher, right,
it might cause you know, some of these rents to
go back. I mean, there's a whole host of things here.
So that whole conundrum about being able to buy a
house because mortgage rates are so high, or a car,
you run the risk of okay, rent being higher than
you know, the cost of rent is greater right now,
(18:15):
for the.
Speaker 3 (18:15):
First time in a very long time, than the cost
of buying.
Speaker 4 (18:17):
A house, right So there's a whole host of things
that kind of play into this, and none of them
are playing particularly well for the Biden administration right now.
So that's one of the reasons why you don't hear
them talk a whole heck of a lot about their
kind of you know, inclination for lower interest rates. We
know that Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren came out, i
want to say, a couple months ago with an open
(18:38):
letter to fed share Pal suggesting that they better lower
rates soon. I don't think those two know what they're
talking about at the moment right now, because the worst
thing that could happen for the Biden administration into the
November election is that you know, you see inflation picked
back up, and that really going to hurt a voting
block in Middle America or in certain social economic you
(19:00):
know what I mean sort of demos that they really
need to win the reelection here and again, So there's
no easy answer right now.
Speaker 1 (19:07):
The thing about the interest rates problem is, and I
think this is really what Chairman Powell is worried about,
is that if you cut interest rates too soon, you
really could end up just kicking inflation back. I mean,
even though people hate inflation and they're not happy with
it relatively speaking, and again, this doesn't make people who
(19:31):
can't buy a house feel better. It's been bad, but
it hasn't crashed us into a recession, which a lot
of people were worried it would.
Speaker 3 (19:38):
No doubt about it.
Speaker 4 (19:39):
But in certain swaths of the American public, they feel
like they're deeply in a recession. And all you have
to do is go back and look at some of
the comments that you heard from McDonald's, from Starbucks, from Disney.
I mean, the list goes on and on these consumer
oriented companies, and you could say, well, Disney is consumer discretionary.
If you're spending seven dollars for a latte on a
daily basis, you could trade down to the food truck
(20:00):
on the.
Speaker 3 (20:01):
Corner at a dollar.
Speaker 4 (20:02):
But when McDonald's talks about their consumers trading down from
five or six dollars, value meals where are they trading
down to, right, And so that is the consumer that
you're really worried about. So you know, lowering interest rates
right now probably doesn't do a whole heck of a
lot because you have to look at the rate that
basically Fed funds or the ten year rate where lots
(20:23):
of other instruments are priced off of, relative to inflation. Right,
So if the Fed funds rate it's at five and
a half percent and inflation still running at three point
four percent, the rate of two point one or whatever
is not that restrictive right now, So you think they
should I think they have to stay pat They are
worried about inflation becoming entrenched in the economy, and every
(20:46):
day is whether it's wages, whether it's you know, a
whole host of other input costs, you know, whether it
be shipping, whether it be energy, oil in the like here.
If it becomes entrenched in the economy the way it
did in the seventies, and you have lower than trend growth,
then you have something called stagflation, which you.
Speaker 3 (21:04):
And I have not heard a whole heckle a lot
about stagflation.
Speaker 1 (21:07):
Is the nightmare. Talk to us about stagflation.
Speaker 4 (21:10):
Right, And really, what that would mean is that these
higher prices become entrench in the economy. Companies have to
try to pass through those higher costs to consumers. Consumers
pull back in their spending, causing less than expected growth.
But then ultimately the consumer hits a wall. Corporations hit
a wall. They can't pass through prices anymore to their customers.
(21:31):
They start laying people off. And just remember we have
unemployment rate below four percent, that's still at a fifty
or fifty five year low, right, So then all of
a sudden you have unemployment start to tick up, right,
and so all of this is really a very negative
sort of cycle that can happen in the economy.
Speaker 3 (21:49):
Those are the sort of worst scenarios, and.
Speaker 1 (21:51):
That's what killed Carter.
Speaker 3 (21:53):
Correct.
Speaker 1 (21:53):
Stagflation is what killed Jimmy Carter, among other things, and
it is the nightmare scenario that was very hard to
get out of. And it seems very likely that we
will not hit into stagflation at this point.
Speaker 4 (22:06):
Well, I mean, who knows, you know, at this point.
And again, a lot of this might be messaging. If
you look at the way that Biden is polling on
the economy relative to a potential Trump administration, you know,
he's not doing particularly well despite the fact that they've
had a number of really you know, great legislative wins
as it relates to the economy.
Speaker 3 (22:24):
Think about the Chip sack and the like.
Speaker 1 (22:26):
Yeah, but I want you to pause back and talk
about stagflation for a minute. You know, Yes, the Biden
administration is not breaking through on messaging when it comes
to the economy. But I feel like I'm more curious
about what you think the Fed should do to kind
of pull us out of this, or do you think
it's better just a way.
Speaker 3 (22:45):
No, I think the Fed they're doing their job.
Speaker 4 (22:47):
They did the right thing by raising interest rates right
relative to the pace of inflation. And I think the
fact that they are not willing to kind of drop
the mic and put up a mission impossible sort of
sign makes a lot of sense right here, because if
the first three months of this year were any indication
you know, about the potential for a reflation right and
(23:09):
the disinflation of inflation, I know there was a.
Speaker 3 (23:11):
Lot there, Like that is what their big worry is.
Speaker 4 (23:14):
And so to me, keeping the rate high right has
the potential of slowing down the economy, which is essentially
what they want to do, right. They want to slower
the pace of jobs growth, They're starting to do that.
They want to slower the pace of consumption, they're starting
to do that, right, And so the idea of taking
their foot off the pedal right now, then you run
the risk of basically lowering interest rates causing inflation to
(23:37):
get going again, making you know, just kind of financial
conditions that much easier. And then you run the risk
of basically inflating a bubble in risk assets too. And
don't think for a second that the stock market, the
housing market don't play into this because the wealth effect
that created by the stock market at all time highs
and housing market, you know, at unusually high levels, you know,
(23:58):
creates this situation where you know, no one can see
an end in sight to risk asset inflation, and then
you run the risk of it popping like we had
in twenty twenty two and a bear market.
Speaker 1 (24:09):
So it really is a very delicate dance to try
to lower inflation for the consumer because you know, for
the people in the middle of the country, for whom
McDonald's is now, you know, twenty percent of the budget
as opposed to fifteen or whatever that looks like, and
not get into one of these really dangerous cycles. But
(24:33):
part of the fundamental problem with this economy is still
that it's too good.
Speaker 4 (24:37):
Yeah well, I mean, listen, you're going to hear this
term all this time hot on Financial TV. That is
a sort of Goldilock situation in a way. I mean,
corporate profits are doing very well. The ability to pass
through these price increases has been good for their margins
and good for profitability. But you know, just this morning,
this is Thursday morning, as we're recording it, Walmart's earnings
are out. The stock is at a new all time
(24:59):
high nearly six percent. The headline is Walmart sales surge
as wealthy shoppers flock to retailers. So think about that.
There's a trade down in the wealth level of their shoppers.
So people are starting to feel it. They're looking for value,
and those sorts of things have the ability to kind
of creep up and then have an effect, you know
(25:19):
what I mean on the economy all at once. You
have two thirds of our economy the GDP comes from
the consumer. So the warning signs are there that the
consumer is slowing at a time where unemployment is still
really low, and that sort of ingredient with high inflation
and high interest rates have the potential to cause an
economic downturn.
Speaker 3 (25:40):
You mentioned it.
Speaker 4 (25:40):
A lot of folks coming into twenty twenty three were
convinced that we were going to have a recession. We
never did. The FED was getting ready to ease policy,
but then inflation picked back up. And you know, we
haven't even mentioned geopolitics. And one of the biggest kickers
back in early twenty twenty two was when Russia invaded.
Speaker 1 (25:58):
Ukraine, right because of fuel.
Speaker 4 (26:00):
Right, and so fuel costs went up dramatically, and so
it also disrupted supply chains. So when you think about this,
one of the reasons why a lot of folks that
look at markets and look at the economy are really
concerned about the situation with China and Taiwan is that
another disruption to supply chains like we saw in COVID.
The national security risks of all of this centralized manufacturing
(26:22):
and supply chains dependent on China has the potential to
cause massive inflationary pressures, especially as we reshore jobs, whether
it be in semiconductors or other parts of manufacturing. And
the last point I'll just say, and this is bipartisan
because the Trump administration started this back in early in
their administration, the tariffs and the trade war. You know,
(26:42):
the Biden administration has leaned into this. We're seeing lots
of teriffs being placed on that's also inflationary, So let's talk.
Speaker 1 (26:49):
About the tariffs. This is one of the few times
ever that the Trump administration may have done something right,
which is baffling to me because of the more they
had running that hip and the advice they were taking
from people like Larry Goudlow, who is a lovely person
but is wrong about almost everything. So explain to us
why Trump World was right about tariffs when it comes
(27:12):
to China, and also just explain to me why inflationary
tariffs are somehow good now.
Speaker 3 (27:18):
They're really not. I mean.
Speaker 4 (27:19):
So the point is, I think a lot of it
has to do with diversification away from those supply chains
in China, and also the idea and we've been dealing
with this in the US as it relates to manufacturing
for fifty years. You know, Japan was the bugaboo back
in the eighties that they were going to dump cars
on us and destroy Detroit, and to some degree they
really did. Right now, as you think about the bideninistration
(27:42):
and what they're doing, I mean, they want to be
very pro Detroit auto manufacturing. And we saw that earlier
in the year with the UAW strikes when Biden went
and got on the picket line. Right now, that serves
him politically very well, right to have a very strong
message message in Michigan. It's one of the only battle
ground states that he's doing pretty decently. And so the
(28:03):
idea that the Chinese, which have gotten really good at
developing low cost electric vehicles, that they could be selling
them here in the US. It would absolutely sink Tesla,
which is the leader right now in high end electric vehicles.
Elon Musk has wind about it on many occasions that
the Chinese have the potential just to destroy USV manufacturing.
Speaker 3 (28:25):
So he's right about that.
Speaker 4 (28:27):
But really, if you think about the number of cars
that are coming out of Detroit that are fully electric,
I think it was basically one percent of the fifteen
million cars that were made and shipped in America last year,
one hundred and fifty thousand I think between Ford and GM.
Speaker 3 (28:43):
So this is a very nascent industry here in the US.
Speaker 4 (28:46):
I think a lot of folks who are really focused
on this from a environmental standpoint would like to see,
let's say, the Chinese innovation help basically spur competition here
in the US, which will give many, many more consumers
access to these vehicles. And if these ariffs at one
hundred percent coming in from China are basically going to
(29:06):
block US consumers from buying cheap Chinese EV's, but I
just don't think there's demand for cheap Chinese.
Speaker 3 (29:11):
Evs anyway here.
Speaker 4 (29:12):
But again that's the risk, and they're also putting them
on steel and a whole host of other things. And
again going back to the Trump administration, you know that
wasn't that popular if you think about it back at
the time on certain forms of manufacturing companies because they
rely on that cheap steel and they lost a lot
of jobs in the heartland because of those high terraffs.
Speaker 1 (29:33):
Right. So, do you think ultimately the Trump world was
wrong and Biden world is wrong?
Speaker 3 (29:38):
No, I think they were probably right.
Speaker 4 (29:40):
If you think about this sort of deal that the
US manufacturing had made that benefited US consumers some fifty
years ago. You know, we got addicted to cheap manufactured
goods in China, but at the hollowing out of our
manufacturing capabilities has done a number on our economy if
you think about it, right, And so I think they
(30:00):
were probably right in some manners. I think the Biden
administration basically left all those tariffs in place, and now
we're getting a bit more aggressive. You know, again, a
lot of it is messaging, right, and how you want
to play in this global you know playing field. I mean,
the Trump administration they basically went after very hard, you know,
China and some other parts of the world, and that
(30:22):
was you know, basically one of their big economic messages,
and for many reasons it's right. But the other thing
I'll just say is that, you know, if you think
about twenty and sixteen to twenty and twenty four, what
is starting to become very apparent is China is much
weaker than we would have given them any credit for.
Speaker 3 (30:40):
You know, than a few years ago.
Speaker 4 (30:41):
They have a massive demographic problem, they have huge economic
problems that have not really made it to our shores
just yet, and so maybe they're not the sort of
you know adversary economically that we think they are. And therefore,
you know, the idea of kind of pressing their neck
right now may cause them to do something that we
don't want them to do on the geopolitical front, and
(31:02):
that is some sort of you know, embargo on Taiwan
or as trying to take Taiwan, because that would be
something that I think would be disasterus if you thought
the Ukraine invasion was bad for all the things we
just talked about, you know, cutting off access to chips
and by the way, Taiwan makes probably eighty five percent
of high end chips right now, they're distributed all over
(31:24):
the world.
Speaker 3 (31:24):
That would be a very bad thing for the global economy.
Speaker 1 (31:27):
Yeah, these are all really really salient and important points.
And China is both not as strong as we worry
they are, but also way more dangerous than Russia ultimately
because they have money and they have real stuff. I
want you just for a second to talk about there
are people on the left. They're like the politicians that
(31:49):
my husband hates, but I like them ideologically, But he
hates them because he's a venture capitalist and he's the best,
but I think he's wrong on this. But they want
to push to lower gross prices. I'm talking about Elizabeth Warren,
I'm talking about Bernie Sanders. This is like capitalist creates
a lot of capitalist anxiety. I mean, is there a
place for.
Speaker 3 (32:08):
That or now? Not really?
Speaker 4 (32:10):
I mean, you know, when you think about it, past
administrations they've looked for different ways to kind of you know,
like through the social safety net to kind of, you know,
help reduce the cost of some of these things. But
at the end of the day, you know, we really
don't have mechanisms in our capitalistic kind of.
Speaker 3 (32:25):
Way of life to do that, right.
Speaker 4 (32:27):
And so again this comes down to the sort of
choices that you make and the parties that you align with,
and you know, the Democratic Party, whether it be the
far left coming up with these sorts of plans, it's
kind of helping move the center to the left, I
think a little bit if that makes some sense on
some of these issues that I know you and I
and your husband care deeply about. But the way in
which people want to institute these policies are very different. Right,
(32:49):
So when I think about this, one of the major
differences that I always consider when I think about some
of let's say, the economic policies on the right that
make some sense to me more so than say coming
out of Bernie and Elizabeth Warren. I mean, what I
care about is that our tax dollars go to the
most vulnerable in some ways, to some of the most
vulnerable citizens in our country. And I think on the
right they think of them as handouts, right, And so
(33:12):
to me, that's where just I just like draw the
line to some degree. So again, I don't agree with
Bernie and Elizabeth Warren, but I do believe that the
Democratic Party, and I think the things that they stand
for as it relates to the social safety that are
worth fighting for.
Speaker 3 (33:26):
And that's where I stand.
Speaker 1 (33:27):
Thank you, Dan, You're the best, all.
Speaker 3 (33:30):
Right, Olli, John Fast, It's always a plusure.
Speaker 1 (33:34):
Jacob Rubashkan is an analyst and reporter for Inside Elections.
Welcome back to Fast Politics, Jacob Rubashkan.
Speaker 5 (33:42):
Thank you so much for having me.
Speaker 1 (33:44):
So let's talk about what the landscape looks like in
twenty twenty four.
Speaker 5 (33:50):
Yeah, leak for Democrats on the Senate side at least.
Speaker 1 (33:53):
First, let's talk about the Senate map. Primaries went basically
as good as they could for Democrats, right, Yeah.
Speaker 5 (34:02):
I think in the places where Democrats needed wins, they
got them. They got the candidates they preferred and some
of the tougher races, and obviously Democrats one thing that
they have going for them is that they don't have
very many primaries themselves, right. I Mean, it's almost entirely
incumbents or people without primaries. Maryland was really kind of
the big competitive race that also had a competitive primary,
(34:24):
was a standout in that regard.
Speaker 1 (34:27):
So let's talk about that. I feel like black women
candidates have kind of gotten screwed, especially when it comes
to Senate. We've only had three black women senators, which
is insanity. But it looks like that's possibly about to.
Speaker 5 (34:40):
Change, right, Yeah, No, I think that it will most
likely change. There are two black women who are poised
to win their Senate races this cycle. I mean, Lisa
Blunt Rochester in Delaware is basically a shoe in. She
doesn't face any real opposition in her primary or in
the general election, so she's going to be there next year.
And Angela also Brooks in Maryland. I think we still
(35:02):
consider her the favorite to win the Maryland Senate race,
even against Larry Hogan. It'll be a tough contest, but
we see her favorite, and she would be of course,
the other black women in the Senate, they would go
from zero to two, and two is more than they've
ever had at the same time in the Senate in history.
Speaker 1 (35:20):
We have a black woman senator from California right now,
but she's about to be replaced by a white man. Yes,
let's just game this out. There's a slate of really
bad polls that show a lot of stuff. But if
we were just to go on twenty twenty two, or
even twenty twenty three, or even twenty twenty all of
(35:41):
the elections where Democrats have overperformed, and you were to
be a little optimistic, what Senate seats. Do you think
Democrats can either keep or pick up.
Speaker 5 (35:51):
Look, I think that in the best case scenario for Democrats,
they hold everything except West Virginia. I mean, West Virginia
is off the board. I don't even talk about it
anymore because it's so out of mind. Without Joe Manchin,
that seat is gone and that up ends the whole math.
But we'll leave that aside for a second. I think
there are paths to victory for both John Tester and
(36:11):
Montana and Sheared Brown in Ohio. Those are the two
most vulnerable seats, but it's not West Virginia territory. They're
not being triaged, they're not dead men walking.
Speaker 1 (36:20):
And they are also amazing candidates that are pretty different.
You know, those candidates are amazing candidates.
Speaker 5 (36:29):
And this is something that Democrats have going for them,
is though they brought back almost all of their incumbents,
and that really makes a difference. A lot of the
time when we see big swings in Senate composition, it
is because incumbents decide not to run for reelection. I mean,
think about twenty fourteen, which I think is still kind
of If you're trying to understand why Democrats have been
(36:50):
such a deep hole in the Senate for so long.
Twenty fourteen is the year that you have to look to.
Republicans flipped nine seats that year. It was a blood
bat and it was in part because they had they
want a bunch of really narrow victories in states against
incumbents like North Carolina and Alaska, but also because Parkin
retired in Iowa, and you had other Democratic senators in
(37:13):
Republican states who didn't even bother trying to win reelection.
They just hung up the cleats and went home. And
I think what is keeping Democratic hopes alive is that
neither John Tester nor Shared Brown made that calculation. This time,
they're giving the party a fighting chance in both of
those states.
Speaker 1 (37:30):
Let's talk about here's one that because I'm still very
salty from twenty twenty two and the fucking Wisconsin Senate
where Ron Annon was polling nine points ahead and won
against Mandela Barns by one point. If you were looking
(37:51):
at this map, what would be that seed?
Speaker 5 (37:53):
So this one we actually see in a better position
for Democrats than most of their other vulnerable seats.
Speaker 1 (38:02):
What are we we're talking about Tavy Baldwin in Wisconsin. Yeah, yeah,
she's gonna win. That guy's an asshole, sorry, Eric Coovey,
and who comes from California owns a bank.
Speaker 5 (38:13):
The matchup there, I think generally plays well to Senator
Baldwin's strength. Huv D Eric hove.
Speaker 1 (38:19):
D with a ridiculous little mustache.
Speaker 5 (38:22):
He ran for senate in twenty twelve Sands mustache didn't
even win the primary, so the mustache at least has
helped him clear the primary field this time, right or Ormon.
What he has going for him is he is really
really rich, and he unlike some really rich guys who
run for office and don't spend any money or spend
a little bit of money, he really is is opening
(38:45):
up his checkbook and has already been able to go
up on TV and prosecute a message against Senator Baldwin.
But you know, he's got the baggage too, He's got
the California stuff. He has a pension for speaking his
mind in somewhat blunt ways that doesn't sit well with voters.
I mean, he made those comments about how people in
(39:07):
nursing homes might not you know, have the faculties to
be able to vote.
Speaker 1 (39:10):
Insulting old people is always a good way when you're
running for office, always a good moment.
Speaker 5 (39:15):
And you know, in Wisconsin, he made a comment if
I had to start all over, I would say we
shouldn't have legal alcohol sales. He presents some opportunities to
Democrats to paint him as kind of an out of
touch rich guy who's not in it or the people
of Wisconsin. And that's why, you know, I think that
we see Senator Baldwin in a stronger position than either
(39:37):
Shared Brown or John Tester, but also Jackie Rosen in
Nevada and Bob Casey and Pennsylvania and some of these
other candidates as well. You know, Wisconsin I think is
in a better spot for Democrats than a lot of
these other highly competitive Senate races.
Speaker 1 (39:51):
Talk to me about the Senate race that's not on
the map but maybe should be.
Speaker 5 (39:56):
I mean, I think both parties have arguments to make
for one or two states that we don't currently see
as super competitive. On the Democratic side, I think Florida
is the obvious candidate here at the moment, we have
Florida rated solid Republican because it's just not clear that
the likely nominee there. Former Congresswoman w macarstole Powell is
(40:18):
going to be able to stand up the kind of
operation needed to run in the third largest state in
the Union. I mean, Florida is incredibly expensive and she
is not such an incredible fundraiser compared to some of
these other Democrats.
Speaker 1 (40:32):
And he's got a gazillion dollars.
Speaker 5 (40:34):
And he's got a gazillion dollars and he will spend it.
I mean, he spent sixty million on his run in
twenty eighteen. Money is no problem for him. And because
the Biden campaign probably isn't going to invest heavily in Florida,
she's going to have to do it on her own.
And we just at the moment, it doesn't seem like
that is going to happen. It's not going to all
(40:55):
come together for her. And you know, the Florida Democratic
Party has really been struggled in recent years to build
up any kind of infrastructure at a state level, and
so it's difficult. But if things really get better for Biden,
if all of a sudden he's competitive in Florida and
she's able to really kick her fundraising into high gear,
then yeah, Rick Scott has never won a race by
more than one percentage point in the decade he's been
(41:17):
in politics. On paper, this is a seat that could
come online for Democrats on the Republican side. The one
or two that I think they would probably want to
make a run at, or New Mexico or Virginia. I'd
probably place New Mexico above that, just because you know,
this is a state that used to be.
Speaker 1 (41:34):
Because of the Hispanic poll and vote at the polls.
Speaker 5 (41:38):
So New Mexico has the highest Hispanic population I believe
of any state in the country. Republicans have a recruit
in that state that they like, Nela Dimnici. She's the
daughter of former Senator Pete Domenici, so she's got some
built in name id. She is wealthy, and so she
has some self funding capacity. And Martin Heinrich, the incumbent Democrat,
is not a particularly flashy member. He's not on TV
(42:00):
all the time. He's not kind of a high profile
member of the caucus, which can cut both ways. But
I think it might give Republicans an opportunity to define
him a little bit in voters' minds. But New Mexico
is not going to be a competitive presidential state unless
the bottom falls out for Biden, right, So like you
kind of have these extremes on either side. Depending on
where the presidential race goes, we could see one or
(42:22):
the other be competitive.
Speaker 1 (42:23):
Yeah, seems unlikely. So talk to me about the House.
Speaker 5 (42:28):
So the House is definitely a more positive territory for
Democrats than the Senate is. I mean, the Senate is
truly almost entirely defense. That's not a comfortable position to
be the House. Of course, they're in the minority right now,
so by definition they have more room to grow, and
they have room to grow in Democratic leaning territory. There
are a handful of seats in California and New York
(42:50):
that Biden would have carried by double digits last cycle
that Democrats absolutely have to win back if they want
to flip control of the House. I mean, that is
the main path to the majority, and then kind of
everything else. The other seats out there, and there are
probably another fifteen seats that are conceivably targetable on Democratic
side and on Republican side. That'll determine how big the
(43:12):
majority is for either party. But it's going to come
down to those seats in the middle. If Democrats want
to retake control redistricting, there were a couple of states
that redrew their maps. Ultimately, it looks like pretty much
a wash. Republicans are going to pick up a couple
seats out of North Carolina, but Democrats are going to
pick up a seat in Alabama and a seat in Louisiana.
(43:35):
So you know, call it R plus one. But you
know that's the kind of number that comes out in
the wash. It's not really a major upending of the
congressional map from last year to this year at least.
Speaker 1 (43:47):
So what seats are you in the House? What do
you think has promised for Democrats? Where do you think
they can flow?
Speaker 5 (43:56):
So, look, there are two seats on Long Island that
Democrats are interested in, the first district in the fourth district.
I think the fourth district is that one of the
number one pick up opportunities. Maybe number one would have
voted for Biden.
Speaker 1 (44:11):
Who is that?
Speaker 5 (44:12):
That's Congressman Anthony des Posito.
Speaker 1 (44:14):
Oh yeah, yeah, that's the one that John Avlon is
running for.
Speaker 5 (44:18):
Right, No, So he's running in the first district, which
is Nick Loloda.
Speaker 1 (44:22):
Who's ds Posito running in.
Speaker 5 (44:24):
So d s Posito is running against Laura Gillen, who
is the former Hempstead Town Supervisor. She ran against him
last cycle two and lost by like two points or
something like that, and she's back for the rematch. And
so that you know, that district voted for Biden by
a greater margin than any other seat currently held by
a Republican. So that's certainly top of the list. And
(44:47):
then you kind of go up through the Hudson Valley
New York seventeen with Mike Lawler running against Mandair Jones.
That's going to be a big race. And then the
twenty second district, I think is actually probably a Democrat's
best shot anywhere of flipping a seat.
Speaker 2 (45:02):
What is that?
Speaker 5 (45:02):
So that's Brandon Williams is the Republican. He's a freshman.
It's kind of a Syracuse based on Indaga County district.
There's a Democratic primary there currently going on for the
next couple of weeks. They've got to sort that out.
But then Williams is very vulnerable. He is more conservative
than the district typically goes for, so we actually see
(45:24):
him as like the most vulnerable Republican in the country
right now.
Speaker 1 (45:28):
Oh wow, And then what about on this now it's
in California.
Speaker 5 (45:31):
Yeah, so there are a couple of seats in kind
of the La Orange County area that are going to
be very crucial. So Mike Garcia in California's twenty seventh district.
This is kind of Antelope Valley. It's on the other
side of LA from the Palm Springs District. There is
a Palm Springs district as well that's going to be competitive.
Will Rollins is the Democrat there.
Speaker 1 (45:52):
Yeah, we've had him on a number of times.
Speaker 5 (45:54):
Yeah, running against Ken Calvert, So that's going to be
a tough race. Rollins isn't very strong fundraiser. I think
he's probably one of the best fundraisers that Democrats have
on the challenger side this cycle. But you know those
two races, there's the Michelle Steele seat, which is California's
forty fifth district, is going to be competitive, and then
(46:15):
there are two seats in the Central Valley. Adam Gray
is running against Congressman John Duarti in the thirteenth district,
and that was a race that both of those guys
ran last time. Duarte beat him, but I want to say,
like five hundred votes. It was very narrow.
Speaker 3 (46:31):
It was like this.
Speaker 5 (46:32):
It was the second narrowest after Adam Frisch. It was
the second narrowest race in the country. And then David
Valdeo is also in that area, another seat that would
have voted for Biden by a lot and is represented
by a Republican, and he's also in a rematch against
Rudy Sallis, who's a former state assembly man who's back
for another shot at the seat. So a number of
(46:54):
rematches in California and other highly competitive races that will
also determine and whether Democrats can win back these seats.
I mean, if they're not able to win back seats
that Biden was carrying by ten plus points.
Speaker 1 (47:08):
Right right, right, that's real weird. So let me ask you,
is Lauren Bobert safe?
Speaker 2 (47:14):
Now?
Speaker 1 (47:14):
Talk to us about the sort of crazies like the
Matt Gates, the Anna Paulina Luna bad Crow, the Arson s.
Speaker 5 (47:23):
Lauren Bobert is an interesting one because she made that
district jump. Right, if she had remained in her current district,
she'd be very vulnerable. I think she knew that. That's
why she drove across the state. Right we were talking
hundreds of miles from the third district to the fourth
district to try and run in a very crowded Republican
primary in a safe seat. Now she's got to win
her primary, which is going to be tough. When is
(47:45):
the primary it's coming up? I want to say June
twenty fifth is the Colorado primary, and you know, if
she can win her primary, then she'll be set, you know,
for however long she wants, until you know, if they
redraw the district in a decade or whatever. But that's
a very solid Republican district. Matt Gates similar story. I mean,
that's the Florida Panhandle is among the most Republican places
(48:08):
in the country at this point. Marjorie Taylor Green Northeast
Northwest Georgia is you know, that's Republican country. And a
Paulina Luna is an interesting one because that district on
paper is a little swing yer kind of that Saint
Petersburg Tampa Bay area. Charlie crist held that seat for
a while. There is a crowded Democratic primary there, which
(48:29):
I'm kind of surprised by because it's not a top
tier opportunity, but you've got four or five Democrats running
credible campaigns trying to get the nomination there. I think
that if we see some sort of snap back for
Democrats in Florida. That's the one seat that could be
competitive in the entire state. You know, pretty incredible. Almost
thirty congressional districts in this state, and at most one
(48:51):
or two of them would conceivably flip. They did a
very good job of gerrymandering that state when they redraw
the maps last cycle. But she's a kind of that
caucus that Austin Kevin McCarthy and has been causing so
much trouble for Republican leadership. She's the one who comes
from the swingiest district by far.
Speaker 1 (49:11):
Yeah, that's so interesting. Thank you so much. Jacob Robashkan, Yeah,
powis a pleasure. No sick, Jesse Cannon.
Speaker 6 (49:23):
My junk fast. You know, we all know that Trump
gets compared to a mob boss a lot, but trickling
down what all the people below him should say really
puts a fine note on it.
Speaker 1 (49:35):
New York Magazine journalist Andrew Rice said he saw as
he was sitting in the courtroom, Donald Trump editing what
he was going to have his surrogate say, getting around
the gag order, having them malign the judge and his
daughter during his criminal trial while his former lawyer and fixer,
(49:57):
Michael Cohen testifies about his hush money payments to an
adult film star. That, my friends, is our moment of U.
Speaker 3 (50:07):
Right.
Speaker 1 (50:09):
That's it for this episode of Fast Politics. Tune in
every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday to hear the best minds
in politics makes sense of all this chaos. If you
enjoyed what you've heard, please send it to a friend
and keep the conversation going. And again, thanks for listening.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
The Nikki Glaser Podcast
Every week comedian and infamous roaster Nikki Glaser provides a fun, fast-paced, and brutally honest look into current pop-culture and her own personal life.