December 2, 2025 • 40 mins
These days, it can sometimes feel like the terms Democrat and Republican are confusing -- that they've lost meaning over time. Former Speechwriter and Pod Save America host, Jon Favreau, actually wrote his college thesis about a concept called "realignment." Or, the idea that political parties frequently reinvent themselves and their values. But why do the parties keep changing their identities? Is it as alarming as it sometimes feels to us as voters? And what does that mean for the future of our country?
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 (00:01):
The year was two thousand and seven. The original iPhone
had just been released. Soldier Boy was enjoying a seven
week run atop the Billboard top one hundred, and I
had finally achieved some semblance of job security as an actor.
I was playing doctor Lawrence Kutner on the hit medical
drama House, and I was finally living out my dream,
(00:21):
not to mention my parents' dream of telling people their
son was a doctor, well sort of a doctor. Then
one day I made the mistake of letting my House
co star Olivia Wilde talk me into attending an event
for then presidential candidate Barack Obama. Hearing Obama speak would
change my life. I started volunteering on his campaign and
had the chance to go all over the country. Eventually,
(00:43):
I took a short sabbatical from acting to serve in
the White House. Obama, of course, was that one of
a kind politician with an unmatched ability to deliver a speech.
Even as haters would agree with something like that. But
I can't help but wonder what my life and the
lives of many of my friends would be like if
not for the person who helped Obama craft those remarks,
(01:03):
the ones that would so deeply affect all of us.
That person is my guest.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
Today, Democrats always seem like they are reading the stage
directions all the time. When something happens in the news,
before you ask your advisors, before you look on social media,
before you read any news stories about it, or any opinions,
just what do you think?
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Jon Favreau is President Obama's former speech writer and now
host of pod Save America. On the campaign, he and
I got to know each other as we trudged through
snowy cornfields in Iowa and ducked into church basements in
remote South Carolina towns. I especially wanted to talk to
John today because of how many of us are feeling
about American politics today, political parties, How do our parties
(01:45):
actually reinvent themselves? What flips the script? Who makes it happen?
And what does the future look like? Here we Oon
agon aon Hey, I'm cal Pen and this is here
we Go Again, a show that takes today's trends and
headlines and asks why does history keep repeating itself? Here?
(02:23):
How are you doing? I'm good today. I'm talking to
the guy I told you about. Jon Favreau is the
co founder of Crooked media, the co host of Pod
Save America, a former political speech writer under Barack Obama
and a political commentator and writer, and full disclosure of
friend of mine. For like the last it has been
fifteen years, I.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
Was thinking that, yeah, it's been about fifteen years.
Speaker 1 (02:45):
Welcome John, Good to be here. Man. Obviously I listened
to the pod and we've had conversations about the state
of the world as well, and we generally, I think,
are in agreement. But the first segment of our show
is usually sort of looking back. It's on the history
of things, and so the idea of the political parties
change all the time was something that I started kind
(03:07):
of thinking about a little bit, especially in today's context.
And I certainly forgot that there was a time when
Democratic party values and Republican party values were basically an
inverse of what they are today. How much do you
remember about Andrew Jackson Dems and the Abraham Lincoln Republicans?
Like what was the one to eighty that both parties
(03:27):
did in ensuring a reinvention on both their parts.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
So it's funny the question of how political parties change,
which is sometimes known as realignment. It's like, so that's
the political that's fancy political science term. I actually did
my thesis on this when I knowledge Okay, so not
only do you have just a just a dumb podcast
on but I do there's some academic grounding to what
(03:57):
I'm about to say.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
By the way, what a time to be alive. After
writing that thesis years ago and like virtually nothing happened,
and now all of a sudden, look at what's going on.
Speaker 2 (04:05):
Democratic Party starts with Andrew Jackson. Andrew Jackson is from
Carolina's from the Carolina backwater. It's now South Carolina, but
at the time it was Carolina backwater. And he ends
up as president with a real sort of he's like
the first populist that we have in this country, and
he builds a Democratic Party that expands the voting franchise
(04:29):
to still white men, but white men who don't necessarily
own property. That was the big sort of democratic expansion
that Jackson was known for. And then you get the
Southern Democrats that Jackson represents, and they very much want
to continue slavery. So at some point the Northern Democrats
basically split off and Abraham Lincoln sort of forms the
(04:53):
Republican Party, which is basically a coalition of abolitionists, northern
grant voters, and a lot of working class voters, and
that's sort of the new coalition that becomes the Republican Party.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
And to this day, Republicans love saying that Lincoln freed
the slaves and he was a Republican as if it
was the same party. Now. I'm obviously not suggesting that
modern day Republicans are pro slavery the way that it
works back then, but it's obviously kind of a funny,
like pre realignment thing to say, at what point do
the parties kind of become what they are today.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
So fast forward to the nineteen fifties and sixties during
the time of the civil rights movement, and the new
tension is that I guess it's not new because it's
sort of started in Jackson's day, but white Southern Democrats
are against civil rights.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
So John F.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
Kennedy and his presidency tries to kind of allid the
issue and treads very carefully with us. And by the
time we get to after Kennedy is assassinated and Lindon
Johnson becomes president, now he's from you know, he's Texan,
so this is sort of a surprise, but you know,
the civil rights movement at that point had been about
(06:08):
a decade and a few years in the making, and
it sort of comes to a head in Selma when
John Lewis is beaten on a bridge in Selma and
Lyndon Johnson gives this very famous speech in front of
Congress and uses the phrase from the civil rights movement,
we shall overcome and says that he wants to sign
(06:29):
civil rights legislation into law. And apparently, though I don't
know if we know this for sure, after Johnson signed
the civil rights legislation, he is supposed to have said
to someone, I just signed away the South for a generation.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
Oh well, I wanted to ask you about Reagan too,
that it feels like a major point of reinvention for
the GOP comes when Reagan is elected. It's this cult
of personality thing that they didn't necessarily have before and
thankfully would never have again. What made the Reagan moment
so different pre Trump? Obviously, Yeah, I think what happened.
Speaker 2 (07:06):
What made the Reagan moment so different is that the
Democrats had sort of a lock on Congress and had
been you know, going back and forth on the presidency,
partly because working class voters were overwhelmingly Democrat, and Reagan
found a way to bring a lot of working class
(07:26):
Democrats into the Republican Party. And he did this in
a few ways. There was fanning the flames of racial
resentment by talking about welfare moms, and welfare moms were
in cities and they were you know, Black Americans, Latino
Americans who were just collecting benefits at the expense of
(07:47):
working class white voters. So there was a lot of
talk about welfare. There was a lot of talk about
the elites and how you know, the Democratic elite had
not taken care of working class voters and it had
abandoned the working class of America. And so Reagan was
able to win these voters by he basically tried to
(08:09):
target middle class voters by basically saying that they're the
reason that they were struggling in life, the reason that
they weren't getting the jobs they wanted or their paycheck
wasn't big enough, is because there were all these poorer
Americans who were just sort of lazy, not working and
collecting benefits from the government.
Speaker 1 (08:30):
So all of this then kind of leads up to
post Reagan brings us to two thousand and eight, which
would be monumental in your career and in mind, yeah,
where we met, Yeah, exactly. Can you talk about the
Democratic Party reinvention that took place at the time, and
am I overstating that or was there a bit of
a reinvention in two thousand and seven?
Speaker 2 (08:51):
So the first reinvention happens with Clinton in nineteen ninety
two because at that point Democrats are shut out from
the White House in what three elections? Reagan wins twice,
George HW Bush wins, and so Democrats have been in
the wilderness for quite a while. Clinton is a Southerner
and makes a sort of economic populism and cultural social
(09:17):
moderation on crime welfare at the time it was known
as welfare, crime welfare, and you know, a couple other issues.
He makes that sort of his persona and his platform,
and that is enough to peel away some of the
they were then called Reagan Democrats, and win back some
of the Reagan Democrats and assemble a coalition to win
(09:38):
the White House twice. Then Bush wins and obviously a
very close race in two thousand and post nine to eleven.
Then you have the Democrats in the wilderness again because
George W. Bush is so popular after nine to eleven,
So then Carl Rose talking about a realignment where now
you know, Republicans could win for a generation, and then
(10:00):
the Iraq War happens, and that drags on for many years,
too many years, and so by the time two thousand
and seven rules around, you have a country that is
very tired and angry with George W. Bush over his
prosecution of the Iraq War. He is also at that
(10:21):
point tried to privatize social security unsuccessfully. He has passed
a huge tax cut that has mostly just gone to
the wealthiest view and so there's just a real there's
sort of like a bubbling anger in the country towards
the Republican Party and also by the way, to a
lot of people in the Democratic Party for going along
(10:43):
with the war in Iraq. So that sort of sets
the stage for someone to come along as an outsider
who promises to challenge the establishment, challenge the establishment's Washington
mindset that got us into Iraq in the first place.
And that's where Barack Obama comes at.
Speaker 1 (11:02):
One of the core memories I have from joining the
campaign that October October of oh seven was the number
of young people who were like my age plus or
minus probably ten years, honestly, and that's common in any
political campaign on either side of the aisle, frankly. But
the thing that was different was that nobody who was
working for Barack Obama in Iowa or New Hampshire in
two thousand and seven was doing it because they were
(11:24):
gunning for a White House job. They were just doing
it because they genuinely thought that this could make the
country better. He probably wasn't going to win, but they
could help move the goalposts slightly so that whoever the
nominee actually is would be better on issues like war
or not taking federal lobbyist money or any of those things.
You were twenty seven when you wrote the Yes we
Can speech? Is that right? No?
Speaker 2 (11:46):
I was twenty I was twenty seven when when he
won and I walked into the White House, I was
twenty seven, So I don't know, twenty five, twenty twenty five?
Speaker 1 (11:53):
Hell ya, okay, Well that's even better one of those ages.
One of the things that we try to do with
this podcast is, you know, not just do the doom
and gloom, but like some of the sort of aspirational
stories that come out of these conversations. So you're twenty five,
you were Barack Obama's head speech writer. Can you walk
us through what it was like writing that speech and
did you understand the impact that it might have? Was
(12:15):
that the hope, not at all.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
I didn't have any idea the impact would have because
it was the night before the New Hampshire primary and
we had been campaigning relentlessly since Iowa and I was
very tired. And Ben Rhodes and I one of my
co hosts here at Cricket Media, but also at the
time my speech writing colleague, and Obama called Ben and
I when we were writing the speech and said, you know,
the one thing I want to really make clear in
(12:41):
this speech is that this is going to be along
road and even if we win New Hampshire, we could
still lose other primaries. Even if we win those other primaries,
we could still lose the general election. And even if
we win the general election, that's we still it's going
to be an uphill climb in the White House to
do all the things I've talked about doing, and so
(13:01):
I want to He's like, I want a sense of
history in the speech, and I want people to come
away with a sense that it has always been really
difficult in this country to bring about change, and it
has taken time, and that's just how America is. But
the fact that we have made progress even when it
seems impossible to do so should give us hope that
(13:24):
we can continue to make progress even in the face
of the challenges we have now. So that's where sort
of that yes we can speech. He didn't know at
the time that we were going to lose to Hillary
Clinton in the New Hampshire primary. But so when we
wrote the speech as if he was going to win
the primary, and when we found out that he was
(13:44):
not going to win the primary and then Hillary Clinton
was going to upset him in New Hampshire, we didn't
have to change much of the speech at all because
we had written it. All we did was change the
opening to congratulate Hillary, and then we gave the same
speech that we were going to give because it was
a speech about sort of persevering in the face of
difficult circumstances.
Speaker 1 (14:03):
Oh, that's cool. I didn't I didn't know that story. Yeah. Also,
I was laughing in the middle because it like, obviously
it's Obama and it's and it's you. So the incredibly
eloquent way of trying to tell people they need to
have patients and need to like keep keep up with
their organizing. I was laughing because in twenty sixteen I
was helping Bernie out in the primary, and I remember
(14:24):
there was this strategy meeting. Vine was really big in
twenty sixteen. Vine was the one where it was like
six seconds, right, yeah, yeah, so Vine was really big,
and somebody somebody had said, senator, you know, you really
need a strong Vine presence because you need to distill
all of your popular stuff into like these six second clips.
It would really help help you with younger voters. And
(14:45):
he was so mad about it. I just remember him
like there were twenty of us in the room, because
you know, you know what, these young people they need
to not have the attention spans of a net. That's
what they need. They need to not have the attention
spans of a net. And we all sort of looked
at each other. We're like, well, okay, senator, I mean
we're not going to push back on it. If your
answer is no is just a thought.
Speaker 2 (15:04):
And now the intention spans are shorter than an exactly
of an AD, so you got it to only gotten worse.
Speaker 1 (15:10):
Did you read the article? No, I read the headline?
Yeah right, okay. So one of the things that I
appreciate about you and pot Save American frankly across Crooked
is you guys are generally appropriately circumspect about where the
parties may have gone wrong, and particularly not shy about
sort of holding up a mirror to the Democratic Party
or our friends on the left. In terms of this
(15:32):
long arc of party reinvention from the eighteen twenties through
the mid two thousands basically to the Obama era, do
you feel like the parties truly reinvented themselves or was
it just like they switched places.
Speaker 2 (15:46):
It depends on the issue, right, Like, I think that
there has been a thread running through the Democratic Party
since the beginning that it is a party that is
trying to stand up for the little man, working people,
whatever cliche you want to use. And there have been
plenty of times, particularly during the Jackson era, and then again, actually,
(16:08):
you know, after civil Rights has passed, where portions of
the party, people who've led the party thought okay, yeah,
we want to stand up for the common man, common woman,
but only if they are white, only if they are
the right kind of person, Like I said, common man,
common women. Sometimes it wasn't women, right, it was just men.
So I think the Democratic Party, you could say, has
(16:30):
been focused on fighting for working people, but has evolved
over the years to expand that promise and expand that
fight for more and more people, right Like Obama and
I always talked about this, and this is how we
ended up starting his second inaugural, which Obama sort of
believes that everything in America comes back to those opening
(16:52):
lines in the Declaration of Independence, which is, you know,
we're all created equal, and we all have the right
to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And the
story of America is trying to make that founding promise
real from more and more people. And even though the
people who wrote that founding promise down certainly did not
(17:12):
intend to give it to every single person, They certainly
didn't believe that everyone was created equal, the fact that
it was written down and it stands as like our
north star as a country is what has allowed us
to make progress over time and expand the circle of
people who we believe should enjoy that founding promise. And
(17:34):
so I do think the Democratic Party has been more
or less on that side of history a little for
most of the country's history.
Speaker 1 (17:49):
There's so many things to tackle within now, I guess,
just starting with Trump as president, how has the Republican
Party reinvented itself in the current moment and in your view,
what got them here? It's a great question.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
So I think that under Donald Trump, the Republican Party
has sort of transformed politics so that the most salient
divide is not necessarily left right, but top bottom and
like in a gayway, like yeah, they are, they are
Republican Party in this their power bottoms.
Speaker 1 (18:22):
Perfect love one of those.
Speaker 2 (18:27):
Or you can also say inside out right like they are.
It is actually returning to the Andrew Jackson style of
populism right and populism. Not in the good way, not
in like the Bernie economic populism way, but in the
elites and.
Speaker 1 (18:40):
Liberals and experts.
Speaker 2 (18:43):
They have let you down, they have abandoned you, they
don't listen to you. And I am the voice of
the people. I will now protect the American people and
sort of bring back this American greatness. Right, this is
what fucking make America great again comes from. And so
Donald Trump, by sheer sort of force of personality was
(19:04):
able to I think exploit severe distrust in institutions that
had built up over time. People not only distrust government,
but also business, the media, Catholic church, you name it. Right, Like,
institutions have had a bad run over the last couple decades.
And Donald Trump and this version of the Republican Party
(19:27):
has been able to exploit those frustrations to say, we
will smash those institutions for you, and then we will
know govern according to how the people want us to govern. Right,
And so they claim this popular mandate for everything they do,
and they claim that mandate in opposition to the elites
and the institutions and the experts that have you know,
(19:48):
ostensibly sort of run America for the last several decades.
And it is a critique that is targeted at both parties.
Speaker 1 (19:57):
Right.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
So one of the reasons that Donald Trump us full
is because he you know, went to war with the
traditional Republican Party, the Mitch McConnell's and the Jeb Bushes
and you know a long line of people who have
not been on board with everything that Trump wanted to do.
And so by positioning himself as both someone who takes
on the Republican Party and the Democratic Party as this
(20:19):
populist hero. You know, he's been able to sort of
reshape the Republican Party in that image more or less.
Like it hasn't worked totally obviously, but that's sort of
where he's going. And I think now that we are
in fucking year ten of this guy in our lives,
you see, you know, I think we saw this in
(20:41):
all the Republicans voting to pass his economic plan, and
there was it didn't matter what sort of ideology you
were in the Republican Party, what policy positions you had,
you just you got on board with what Donald Trump
wanted because it's Donald Trump's party.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
I mean, that's what I find so impressive in both
his terms, frankly, as is that if you look at
a list of what Republicans since Reagan really or Nixon
even really wanted, right like repeal row, lower taxes on
wealthy people, get rid of social safety net programs, trash
climate programs. Objectively speaking, like, I'm not saying this is
(21:17):
a huge lefty but this was on the list of
priorities for every Republican administration. But Trump was the one
who got it done in ways that no other Republican
could get it done, and just it's impressive oddly. I mean,
I don't agree with any of those decisions, but the
scope at which and the speed at which that has
happened under his leadership is kind of breathtaking.
Speaker 2 (21:39):
Well, and the reason it is, the reason it's happened
is because he has not really paid that much attention
to the law laws, right. I mean, here's the challenge
in talking about the parties right now, which is, our
minds are still operating in an electoral system where there's
Democrats and Republicans. They have elections and one party wins
(22:00):
and one party loses, and then you know, the.
Speaker 1 (22:02):
Next selection it switches.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
And that is still happening obviously in this country, at
least as of right now. But I do think that
Donald Trump's project is an authoritarian project, and I don't
think that's not meant to be hyperbole or to free
people out. But the idea is people get frustrated with
democratic institutions because democratic institutions are slow, and you have
(22:25):
to make sure that everyone's on board, and you have
to really get a lot of buy in from.
Speaker 1 (22:29):
A lot of people.
Speaker 2 (22:29):
You have to do the hard work of persuading people
and not just not just dominating them, and so you
don't get as much done, and people don't have patience
for not getting a lot done in part for good reasons. Right,
people are struggling. They're struggling for the cost of living
and they can't buy a house. And so when you
are living a life where you can barely afford to
(22:50):
pay the bills, and someone in Washington is telling you, well,
we're trying to fight for you, but it's going to
take some time. You got to be patient. Change happens slow,
and you're like, I don't know, I don't care about
the laws as much. If someone's going to come along
and just say well, i'll fix it tomorrow and I'll
take some action tomorrow, and maybe it's not going to
fix your life right away. Most people who bore down
(23:11):
Frump know he's bullshitting most of the time, but they're like, well,
he's doing some stuff, you know, and that I like
that he's taken some action. And maybe I don't like
all the stuff that he's doing, and maybe it hasn't
affected me yet, but you know, I like that he's
shaking shit up.
Speaker 1 (23:24):
Yeah, it brings me to being really curious about them
now with a lot of grassroots like small democratic local organizing,
even state organizing, that's been inspiring at least at least online.
And then look, I live in New York City. I've
known Zoron Mamdani since he was fourteen through his mom
because she directed me in a film, and so he's
(23:46):
been a friend for a long time, and I had
supported his State Assembly race, and you know, don't agree
with him on every single issue, but it's been phenomenally exciting.
I've been helping him with his campaign the last year
or so for mayor. I'm a heavily biased with this
type of a conversation, but to see how inspiring it's
been in to get text from friends in other cities going,
(24:08):
I'm so fucking jealous you live in New York. You
know that's a feeling that isn't just about this particular candidate.
Isn't just a feeling about like, oh, did everybody suddenly
become Democratic socialists in Brooklyn? And to me, it's more
of a reflection on the state of the Democratic Party.
So I guess my question for you since you have
you're in it every day, and you also don't live
(24:29):
in New York is what will the Democratic Party definitely
not learn from efforts like this.
Speaker 2 (24:37):
Here's my thoughts on I have. This is a take
that I've been turning around in my head on Zoran
any of It's a concern that I have right sure,
which is I see the excitement around the campaign, partly
because he has run a real grassroots campaign of which
we have not seen the likes of since probably we
(24:59):
did this with Obama. Right, and again, I'll go back
to the no longer left right split, but sort of
authoritarian democracy, right and the few versus the many, and
might makes right or everyone gets to say right. And
so Zoron ran a campaign where he went out and
talked to everyone, and you know, most famously one of
(25:22):
his first videos was talking to Trump voters about why
they voted for Donald Trump. And I think he understands
that to fight sort of an authoritarian menace, you need
the buy in of people from all different walks of life,
who don't all look the same, who don't all come
from the same place, and crucially, who don't all believe
(25:42):
the same things about politics, right, because that's the kind
of coalition you need right now. Now, A lot of
the energy behind Zorn's campaign is that same frustration with
the status quo and distrust of institutions and just this
anger that nothing ever gets done, nothing ever really changes.
(26:03):
I think the biggest danger is that he gets in there,
he tries to do a bunch of stuff, he's stymied
by Albany, and you know, because obviously he only has
a certain amount of power as the mayor of New York.
But like at that point, people don't listen to your
explanations of like separations of power and what all Bunny
can do and what the city can do, and all
(26:23):
they have a council like at this and that the
other thing.
Speaker 1 (26:25):
And then suddenly, you know, you worry.
Speaker 2 (26:27):
That people are like, oh, I had such high hopes
and then he just he didn't get to do it,
or he compromised too much, or he didn't get to
pick enough action right. And I do think that democrats
in general are going to have to figure out that
when we take power, we have to use that power
to enact change in a way that is visible to people,
(26:49):
that people can feel immediately, and that once we do
enact change, we don't tell people, Okay, we did this,
you should be good now, and look at these economic statistics.
Everything should be fine. We're all moving in the right direction.
And if you're still pissed, why are you pissed for
we did all this good stuff for you. You have
to constantly communicate that this is a struggle that doesn't
(27:11):
add right. And so if you pass some legislation that's
going to help working people a little bit, say like
that's going to provide some help to you, but that's
not enough. We still have to do X, Y and Z,
and I'm still going to be fighting against these entrench
interests constantly to continue to deliver the change that we
all want that I promised, right, And I do think
that feeling of you're communicating in which Zorin has already
(27:34):
certainly nailed in the campaign, But you're communicating constantly, you're
promising that you're going to fight for people constantly, You're
showing them that you're going to fight for them constantly,
you're delivering on that change, and then you are not
happy with how you delivered that change because it's still
not sufficient enough to you, and you're going to keep
on fighting, like I think that is the only way
(27:55):
to sort of break through and rebuild trust in this
political climate, with this information environment, which is just trash.
Speaker 1 (28:10):
Why do you think we do this? I guess I'll
put myself back in the Democratic Party category when when
I say we but the you know Trump for example, right,
you mentioned rightfully he's a reality TV star and a host.
I think we often sleep on the fact that he's
an Emmy nominated reality TV giant before he won the presidency.
(28:31):
All I hear is mainstream Democrats trying to replicate things
that he's done. So you've got like a Gavin Newsom
thinking like, well, if I shout and go on these
right wing bro podcasts, that'll solve everything, and none of
it seems authentic. Right? Why do we constantly sleep on
how media savvy Trump is and not wanting to counter
it with our own voices? Like I feel like the
(28:52):
last time that heavily biased Again, last time Democratic Party
nationally had a unique aspirational voice was was you know
you writing stuff with the president with Obama, And we
haven't really had it since then. There are inklings of
it with people like a Zoron or a Pete or
whatever you know, like them or hate them ortorically, they
do offer a bit of I think what Obama offered,
(29:13):
But why do you think we genuinely sleep on this?
And what does the future look like given that we
don't seem to have a strategy to move forward yet?
Speaker 2 (29:21):
John Carry loses in two thousand and four, and he
is a war veteran, but he was two of feet
because you know, he's from Boston and he's rich and
so so then when Carry loses, it's like, Okay, well,
now we need someone who I don't know, we just
need someone who's just like a man of the people again.
And no one would have imagined that what you needed
(29:43):
was a guy named Brack Hussein Obama from the South
side of Chicago, whose father was born in Kenya and
who spent some time in Indonesia as a child and
was from Hawaii, like you just no one, no one
going to say that. But he figured out from a
media perspective of what story he was going to tell
of how to counter the Republican narrative about America in
(30:08):
a way that was completely fresh and new and different.
And I do think that part of the issue Democrats
have faced in the Trump era is when they we
try to mimic Trump. He's got a different project than us,
and I think that people sort of underestimate this and
don't think about it enough. Like his project is to
(30:29):
keep people turned against each other, to keep people distrustful
of institutions and expertise, so that he can be the
answer to their problems. He needs to be the bully
because the reason that people support him is because they
want someone who is tough, who can just break the system.
Speaker 1 (30:49):
Right.
Speaker 2 (30:50):
And the policy agenda that follows from that is a
policy agenda where you smash the government to pieces or
take as much of it as you can, put it
under your own control to use it for your own ends.
And when Democrats win, that's not what we want to do.
That's not our policy agenda, right. We believe that we
should have democratic governance, that we should have strong institutions,
(31:13):
that institutions should make sure that it gives a voice
to the minority. We need a completely different style that
also fits with the project that we're trying to pursue,
which is stitching together a multi ethnic, multi racial democracy
in a country of over three hundred million people, where
even if we don't necessarily get along or agree, we
(31:36):
can still live in relative peace and prosperity. That is
a much harder project than what Donald Trump is pursuing,
and it requires a different strategy than the one that
Donald Trump has pursued.
Speaker 1 (31:44):
And in terms of that strategy, what have you learned
through like your podcast The Wilderness? Right, you said that
when Romney lost to Obama, the Giopede did this big
post mortem, essentially interrogetting what went wrong, creating a roadmap
to get you know, how to get back into power.
Seems to have worked, by the way, Dems didn't really
do this post twenty sixteen, and making the Wilderness was
(32:07):
one of your responses. Right, it's in season four. I
have seen zero indication from any of my friends at
any level of the mainstream Democratic Party, whether it was
our former White House friends who worked under Biden Harris
or people who work at the state level. I've just
seen zero indication from any of my friends anywhere that
(32:27):
the Democratic Party has reflected in any way this time again.
And I hope I'm wrong about that, or maybe it's
still too new and they haven't done a full post mortem.
But I guess my question is, have you seen evidence
that they've reflected and what should we be doing looking forward?
Like looking into the future.
Speaker 2 (32:47):
I've seen evidence that some people have reflected on some things.
Speaker 1 (32:52):
Okay, so no, so you've seen no evidence, so no, right, yeah,
I mean there's I mean, how much time we got.
Speaker 2 (32:57):
There's a host of issues here, right, which is I
think since you and I have been involved in politics,
there has been a push within the party, or at
least an acknowledgment, that we have to win working class
voters back.
Speaker 1 (33:12):
And there is a disagreement or.
Speaker 2 (33:15):
How you do that, right that is a Bernie Sanders
like zoron AOC style platform. Is that going to get
working class voters back? Or do you have to moderate
on certain cultural issues? But there is an agreement. I
think that we cannot be a coalition of college educated
(33:35):
voters and black voters who are college educated and non
college educated and sort of their allegiance to the Democratic
Party is basically remnants of the Civil rights era, which
is why also younger black voters are starting to drift
away from a party as well, because they don't have
the memories of older black voters. So if you have
a coalition of just college educated whites and black voters,
(33:57):
you're just not ever going to hold power in this
country again. So there's so like we started off by
losing white working class voters, you know, my first thesis.
Then we under Trump started losing working class Latino voters.
And in this last selection, we started to see black men,
younger black voters, younger voters peel away as well. Again
(34:18):
primarily for if you listen to them in focus groups
and in polls as I do, economic reasons. These people
are afraid they're not going to be able to ever
afford to live in their own house or or live
in their own apartment without having to share it. Every
demographic group that I sat down with for the Wilderness,
housing is like the top of everyone's agenda. Yeah, their
(34:41):
biggest concern. So right, so there is this this belief
that we need to bring back working class voters.
Speaker 1 (34:46):
Then the question is how do you do that? So
there is a policy debate to be had.
Speaker 2 (34:50):
And you know, I think you made the point earlier
in the conversation that people don't necessarily just vote on
policies that are going to be like good for their families.
Like I think one thing that Zoron did well is
and like and Trump did this too, Like Trump had
the wall, you got what the Wall was right. It
was just it was an easy to understand policy idea
Zorn had, Like we're going to have you know, we're
(35:12):
going to freeze the rent. Yeah, we're just going to
do that, free city buses, right, Like, these are things
that I could just say and they sat. Now are
they going to work? Is it going to be able
to enact them? I don't know, right, there's like there's
a lot of questions around that. But that's a lot
easier for people to grasp than I think the democratic
policy plans over the last decade or so, which have
been you know, maybe responsibly put together with an eye
(35:35):
toward actually getting them passed, but inscrutable to average people
who don't pay too much attention to politics. And you know,
a tax credit doesn't exactly inspire people to go out
into the streets, right, even if it is the most
sensible policy and the one that's like maybe the most
likely to get done. So we have to figure out
a policy agenda that feels bold and ambitious, because it
(35:59):
is equally is important figure out a way to pass
some of that policy agenda, at least so that people
aren't disappointed when we promise the moon and don't give
them anything. Yeah, right, So that's on the governing side.
Then there's just like the we just need charismatic leaders
in the party which has nothing. You know that this
is separate from the policy issue, which is very important,
(36:22):
but you also just need people who can communicate well
and who can talk well, and who can talk like
normal fucking people. And like I just I don't know
how many other ways I can say it. I've been
saying it.
Speaker 1 (36:33):
For ten years more now fifteen years.
Speaker 2 (36:36):
But it's just like it's we have people who are
sort of wedded to poll tested language which should be
pointing us in a direction, but not giving us an
exact script. I keep saying, like democrats always seem like
they are reading the stage directions all the time, and
it's like, stop reading the stage directions. And just you know,
(36:57):
when something happens in the news, like before you ask
your advisors, before you look on social media, before you
read any news stories about it or any opinions, just what.
Speaker 1 (37:06):
Do you think, Yeah, what do you think about what
just happened?
Speaker 2 (37:09):
Write it down then, and then talk to your advisors
and say, like, this is how I feel about this.
What do you think about me? Saying this, and maybe
they'll say, well, I wouldn't quite say it that way
or this. That's fine, but like, at least figure out
how you feel first totally. And I think you know
to Zorn's campaign, like when you go around and you
just listen to people and you spend a lot of
(37:29):
time listening more so than talking, then when it's time
to actually talk, you have a sense of confidence gained
from hearing from all kinds of people from different walks
of life over and over and over again. And if
you've had those conversations enough, then that gives you the
confidence to say what's on your mind because you have
your focus group of people that you talk to, who
(37:49):
are the voters who are going to potentially put you
in office.
Speaker 1 (37:53):
S Like Jillibrand is listening to this, rolling her eyes like, oh,
I don't want to do any of that, but they
all should. They all should.
Speaker 2 (38:01):
And you know, I also worry that the political environment
is especially now selecting for the type of people who
are super cautious, who have thought about being an elected
office since they were born, and people like you know,
quote unquote normal people, people who never would see themselves
(38:22):
running for office. Like when you look at the political
climate right now. I worry they're going to be like
why would I get myself into that totally? And to me,
I'm like, no, No, this is exactly the moment we need
people who should not necessarily belong in politics or you
wouldn't think of as as someone who'd run for office,
Like this is actually the moment we need those people
(38:44):
more than any other time.
Speaker 1 (38:45):
I agree. That's where and that's where I keep going
back to this, like, I really hope that the party
learns how to support people across the spectrum on the
left because the execution your point earlier, the execution once
these people are actually elected, is key to continuing to
get elected and frankly making people's lives better, which is
the whole purpose to begin with. Yep, this has been
(39:06):
Here we go again. I'm your host, calpen My guest
today was John Favroci. Next time.
Speaker 2 (39:11):
That's fun, dude, It's nice to chat about this. Yeah,
I set back in the news cycle and actually do
the big pictures.
Speaker 1 (39:21):
Here we go again as a production of iHeart Podcasts
and Snaffoo Media in association with New Metric Media. Our
executive producers are me Calpen Ed Helms, Mike Falbo, Melissa Martino,
Andy Kim, Pat Kelly, Chris Kelly, and Dylan Fagin. Caitlin
Fontana is our producer and writer. Dave Shumka is our
producer and editor. Additional writing from Megan tan Our consulting
(39:44):
producer is Romin Borsolino. Tory Smith is our associate producer.
Theme music by Chris Kelly, logo by Matt Gosson, Legal
review from Daniel Welsh, Caroline Johnson and Megan Halson. Special
thanks to Glenn Basner, Isaac Dunham, Adam Horn Lane, and
everyone at iHeart Podcasts, but especially Will Pearson, Carrie Lieberman
(40:05):
and Nikki Etor. Thanks for listening. See you next week.
The year was two thousand and seven. The original iPhone
had just been released. Soldier Boy was enjoying a seven
week run atop the Billboard top one hundred, and I
had finally achieved some semblance of job security as an actor.
I was playing doctor Lawrence Kutner on the hit medical
drama House, and I was finally living out my dream,
(00:21):
not to mention my parents' dream of telling people their
son was a doctor, well sort of a doctor. Then
one day I made the mistake of letting my House
co star Olivia Wilde talk me into attending an event
for then presidential candidate Barack Obama. Hearing Obama speak would
change my life. I started volunteering on his campaign and
had the chance to go all over the country. Eventually,
(00:43):
I took a short sabbatical from acting to serve in
the White House. Obama, of course, was that one of
a kind politician with an unmatched ability to deliver a speech.
Even as haters would agree with something like that. But
I can't help but wonder what my life and the
lives of many of my friends would be like if
not for the person who helped Obama craft those remarks,
(01:03):
the ones that would so deeply affect all of us.
That person is my guest.
Speaker 2 (01:07):
Today, Democrats always seem like they are reading the stage
directions all the time. When something happens in the news,
before you ask your advisors, before you look on social media,
before you read any news stories about it, or any opinions,
just what do you think?
Speaker 1 (01:20):
Jon Favreau is President Obama's former speech writer and now
host of pod Save America. On the campaign, he and
I got to know each other as we trudged through
snowy cornfields in Iowa and ducked into church basements in
remote South Carolina towns. I especially wanted to talk to
John today because of how many of us are feeling
about American politics today, political parties, How do our parties
(01:45):
actually reinvent themselves? What flips the script? Who makes it happen?
And what does the future look like? Here we Oon
agon aon Hey, I'm cal Pen and this is here
we Go Again, a show that takes today's trends and
headlines and asks why does history keep repeating itself? Here?
(02:23):
How are you doing? I'm good today. I'm talking to
the guy I told you about. Jon Favreau is the
co founder of Crooked media, the co host of Pod
Save America, a former political speech writer under Barack Obama
and a political commentator and writer, and full disclosure of
friend of mine. For like the last it has been
fifteen years, I.
Speaker 2 (02:42):
Was thinking that, yeah, it's been about fifteen years.
Speaker 1 (02:45):
Welcome John, Good to be here. Man. Obviously I listened
to the pod and we've had conversations about the state
of the world as well, and we generally, I think,
are in agreement. But the first segment of our show
is usually sort of looking back. It's on the history
of things, and so the idea of the political parties
change all the time was something that I started kind
(03:07):
of thinking about a little bit, especially in today's context.
And I certainly forgot that there was a time when
Democratic party values and Republican party values were basically an
inverse of what they are today. How much do you
remember about Andrew Jackson Dems and the Abraham Lincoln Republicans?
Like what was the one to eighty that both parties
(03:27):
did in ensuring a reinvention on both their parts.
Speaker 2 (03:32):
So it's funny the question of how political parties change,
which is sometimes known as realignment. It's like, so that's
the political that's fancy political science term. I actually did
my thesis on this when I knowledge Okay, so not
only do you have just a just a dumb podcast
on but I do there's some academic grounding to what
(03:57):
I'm about to say.
Speaker 1 (03:57):
By the way, what a time to be alive. After
writing that thesis years ago and like virtually nothing happened,
and now all of a sudden, look at what's going on.
Speaker 2 (04:05):
Democratic Party starts with Andrew Jackson. Andrew Jackson is from
Carolina's from the Carolina backwater. It's now South Carolina, but
at the time it was Carolina backwater. And he ends
up as president with a real sort of he's like
the first populist that we have in this country, and
he builds a Democratic Party that expands the voting franchise
(04:29):
to still white men, but white men who don't necessarily
own property. That was the big sort of democratic expansion
that Jackson was known for. And then you get the
Southern Democrats that Jackson represents, and they very much want
to continue slavery. So at some point the Northern Democrats
basically split off and Abraham Lincoln sort of forms the
(04:53):
Republican Party, which is basically a coalition of abolitionists, northern
grant voters, and a lot of working class voters, and
that's sort of the new coalition that becomes the Republican Party.
Speaker 1 (05:08):
And to this day, Republicans love saying that Lincoln freed
the slaves and he was a Republican as if it
was the same party. Now. I'm obviously not suggesting that
modern day Republicans are pro slavery the way that it
works back then, but it's obviously kind of a funny,
like pre realignment thing to say, at what point do
the parties kind of become what they are today.
Speaker 2 (05:28):
So fast forward to the nineteen fifties and sixties during
the time of the civil rights movement, and the new
tension is that I guess it's not new because it's
sort of started in Jackson's day, but white Southern Democrats
are against civil rights.
Speaker 1 (05:45):
So John F.
Speaker 2 (05:47):
Kennedy and his presidency tries to kind of allid the
issue and treads very carefully with us. And by the
time we get to after Kennedy is assassinated and Lindon
Johnson becomes president, now he's from you know, he's Texan,
so this is sort of a surprise, but you know,
the civil rights movement at that point had been about
(06:08):
a decade and a few years in the making, and
it sort of comes to a head in Selma when
John Lewis is beaten on a bridge in Selma and
Lyndon Johnson gives this very famous speech in front of
Congress and uses the phrase from the civil rights movement,
we shall overcome and says that he wants to sign
(06:29):
civil rights legislation into law. And apparently, though I don't
know if we know this for sure, after Johnson signed
the civil rights legislation, he is supposed to have said
to someone, I just signed away the South for a generation.
Speaker 1 (06:42):
Oh well, I wanted to ask you about Reagan too,
that it feels like a major point of reinvention for
the GOP comes when Reagan is elected. It's this cult
of personality thing that they didn't necessarily have before and
thankfully would never have again. What made the Reagan moment
so different pre Trump? Obviously, Yeah, I think what happened.
Speaker 2 (07:06):
What made the Reagan moment so different is that the
Democrats had sort of a lock on Congress and had
been you know, going back and forth on the presidency,
partly because working class voters were overwhelmingly Democrat, and Reagan
found a way to bring a lot of working class
(07:26):
Democrats into the Republican Party. And he did this in
a few ways. There was fanning the flames of racial
resentment by talking about welfare moms, and welfare moms were
in cities and they were you know, Black Americans, Latino
Americans who were just collecting benefits at the expense of
(07:47):
working class white voters. So there was a lot of
talk about welfare. There was a lot of talk about
the elites and how you know, the Democratic elite had
not taken care of working class voters and it had
abandoned the working class of America. And so Reagan was
able to win these voters by he basically tried to
(08:09):
target middle class voters by basically saying that they're the
reason that they were struggling in life, the reason that
they weren't getting the jobs they wanted or their paycheck
wasn't big enough, is because there were all these poorer
Americans who were just sort of lazy, not working and
collecting benefits from the government.
Speaker 1 (08:30):
So all of this then kind of leads up to
post Reagan brings us to two thousand and eight, which
would be monumental in your career and in mind, yeah,
where we met, Yeah, exactly. Can you talk about the
Democratic Party reinvention that took place at the time, and
am I overstating that or was there a bit of
a reinvention in two thousand and seven?
Speaker 2 (08:51):
So the first reinvention happens with Clinton in nineteen ninety
two because at that point Democrats are shut out from
the White House in what three elections? Reagan wins twice,
George HW Bush wins, and so Democrats have been in
the wilderness for quite a while. Clinton is a Southerner
and makes a sort of economic populism and cultural social
(09:17):
moderation on crime welfare at the time it was known
as welfare, crime welfare, and you know, a couple other issues.
He makes that sort of his persona and his platform,
and that is enough to peel away some of the
they were then called Reagan Democrats, and win back some
of the Reagan Democrats and assemble a coalition to win
(09:38):
the White House twice. Then Bush wins and obviously a
very close race in two thousand and post nine to eleven.
Then you have the Democrats in the wilderness again because
George W. Bush is so popular after nine to eleven,
So then Carl Rose talking about a realignment where now
you know, Republicans could win for a generation, and then
(10:00):
the Iraq War happens, and that drags on for many years,
too many years, and so by the time two thousand
and seven rules around, you have a country that is
very tired and angry with George W. Bush over his
prosecution of the Iraq War. He is also at that
(10:21):
point tried to privatize social security unsuccessfully. He has passed
a huge tax cut that has mostly just gone to
the wealthiest view and so there's just a real there's
sort of like a bubbling anger in the country towards
the Republican Party and also by the way, to a
lot of people in the Democratic Party for going along
(10:43):
with the war in Iraq. So that sort of sets
the stage for someone to come along as an outsider
who promises to challenge the establishment, challenge the establishment's Washington
mindset that got us into Iraq in the first place.
And that's where Barack Obama comes at.
Speaker 1 (11:02):
One of the core memories I have from joining the
campaign that October October of oh seven was the number
of young people who were like my age plus or
minus probably ten years, honestly, and that's common in any
political campaign on either side of the aisle, frankly. But
the thing that was different was that nobody who was
working for Barack Obama in Iowa or New Hampshire in
two thousand and seven was doing it because they were
(11:24):
gunning for a White House job. They were just doing
it because they genuinely thought that this could make the
country better. He probably wasn't going to win, but they
could help move the goalposts slightly so that whoever the
nominee actually is would be better on issues like war
or not taking federal lobbyist money or any of those things.
You were twenty seven when you wrote the Yes we
Can speech? Is that right? No?
Speaker 2 (11:46):
I was twenty I was twenty seven when when he
won and I walked into the White House, I was
twenty seven, So I don't know, twenty five, twenty twenty five?
Speaker 1 (11:53):
Hell ya, okay, Well that's even better one of those ages.
One of the things that we try to do with
this podcast is, you know, not just do the doom
and gloom, but like some of the sort of aspirational
stories that come out of these conversations. So you're twenty five,
you were Barack Obama's head speech writer. Can you walk
us through what it was like writing that speech and
did you understand the impact that it might have? Was
(12:15):
that the hope, not at all.
Speaker 2 (12:18):
I didn't have any idea the impact would have because
it was the night before the New Hampshire primary and
we had been campaigning relentlessly since Iowa and I was
very tired. And Ben Rhodes and I one of my
co hosts here at Cricket Media, but also at the
time my speech writing colleague, and Obama called Ben and
I when we were writing the speech and said, you know,
the one thing I want to really make clear in
(12:41):
this speech is that this is going to be along
road and even if we win New Hampshire, we could
still lose other primaries. Even if we win those other primaries,
we could still lose the general election. And even if
we win the general election, that's we still it's going
to be an uphill climb in the White House to
do all the things I've talked about doing, and so
(13:01):
I want to He's like, I want a sense of
history in the speech, and I want people to come
away with a sense that it has always been really
difficult in this country to bring about change, and it
has taken time, and that's just how America is. But
the fact that we have made progress even when it
seems impossible to do so should give us hope that
(13:24):
we can continue to make progress even in the face
of the challenges we have now. So that's where sort
of that yes we can speech. He didn't know at
the time that we were going to lose to Hillary
Clinton in the New Hampshire primary. But so when we
wrote the speech as if he was going to win
the primary, and when we found out that he was
(13:44):
not going to win the primary and then Hillary Clinton
was going to upset him in New Hampshire, we didn't
have to change much of the speech at all because
we had written it. All we did was change the
opening to congratulate Hillary, and then we gave the same
speech that we were going to give because it was
a speech about sort of persevering in the face of
difficult circumstances.
Speaker 1 (14:03):
Oh, that's cool. I didn't I didn't know that story. Yeah. Also,
I was laughing in the middle because it like, obviously
it's Obama and it's and it's you. So the incredibly
eloquent way of trying to tell people they need to
have patients and need to like keep keep up with
their organizing. I was laughing because in twenty sixteen I
was helping Bernie out in the primary, and I remember
(14:24):
there was this strategy meeting. Vine was really big in
twenty sixteen. Vine was the one where it was like
six seconds, right, yeah, yeah, so Vine was really big,
and somebody somebody had said, senator, you know, you really
need a strong Vine presence because you need to distill
all of your popular stuff into like these six second clips.
It would really help help you with younger voters. And
(14:45):
he was so mad about it. I just remember him
like there were twenty of us in the room, because
you know, you know what, these young people they need
to not have the attention spans of a net. That's
what they need. They need to not have the attention
spans of a net. And we all sort of looked
at each other. We're like, well, okay, senator, I mean
we're not going to push back on it. If your
answer is no is just a thought.
Speaker 2 (15:04):
And now the intention spans are shorter than an exactly
of an AD, so you got it to only gotten worse.
Speaker 1 (15:10):
Did you read the article? No, I read the headline?
Yeah right, okay. So one of the things that I
appreciate about you and pot Save American frankly across Crooked
is you guys are generally appropriately circumspect about where the
parties may have gone wrong, and particularly not shy about
sort of holding up a mirror to the Democratic Party
or our friends on the left. In terms of this
(15:32):
long arc of party reinvention from the eighteen twenties through
the mid two thousands basically to the Obama era, do
you feel like the parties truly reinvented themselves or was
it just like they switched places.
Speaker 2 (15:46):
It depends on the issue, right, Like, I think that
there has been a thread running through the Democratic Party
since the beginning that it is a party that is
trying to stand up for the little man, working people,
whatever cliche you want to use. And there have been
plenty of times, particularly during the Jackson era, and then again, actually,
(16:08):
you know, after civil Rights has passed, where portions of
the party, people who've led the party thought okay, yeah,
we want to stand up for the common man, common woman,
but only if they are white, only if they are
the right kind of person, Like I said, common man,
common women. Sometimes it wasn't women, right, it was just men.
So I think the Democratic Party, you could say, has
(16:30):
been focused on fighting for working people, but has evolved
over the years to expand that promise and expand that
fight for more and more people, right Like Obama and
I always talked about this, and this is how we
ended up starting his second inaugural, which Obama sort of
believes that everything in America comes back to those opening
(16:52):
lines in the Declaration of Independence, which is, you know,
we're all created equal, and we all have the right
to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And the
story of America is trying to make that founding promise
real from more and more people. And even though the
people who wrote that founding promise down certainly did not
(17:12):
intend to give it to every single person, They certainly
didn't believe that everyone was created equal, the fact that
it was written down and it stands as like our
north star as a country is what has allowed us
to make progress over time and expand the circle of
people who we believe should enjoy that founding promise. And
(17:34):
so I do think the Democratic Party has been more
or less on that side of history a little for
most of the country's history.
Speaker 1 (17:49):
There's so many things to tackle within now, I guess,
just starting with Trump as president, how has the Republican
Party reinvented itself in the current moment and in your view,
what got them here? It's a great question.
Speaker 2 (18:04):
So I think that under Donald Trump, the Republican Party
has sort of transformed politics so that the most salient
divide is not necessarily left right, but top bottom and
like in a gayway, like yeah, they are, they are
Republican Party in this their power bottoms.
Speaker 1 (18:22):
Perfect love one of those.
Speaker 2 (18:27):
Or you can also say inside out right like they are.
It is actually returning to the Andrew Jackson style of
populism right and populism. Not in the good way, not
in like the Bernie economic populism way, but in the
elites and.
Speaker 1 (18:40):
Liberals and experts.
Speaker 2 (18:43):
They have let you down, they have abandoned you, they
don't listen to you. And I am the voice of
the people. I will now protect the American people and
sort of bring back this American greatness. Right, this is
what fucking make America great again comes from. And so
Donald Trump, by sheer sort of force of personality was
(19:04):
able to I think exploit severe distrust in institutions that
had built up over time. People not only distrust government,
but also business, the media, Catholic church, you name it. Right, Like,
institutions have had a bad run over the last couple decades.
And Donald Trump and this version of the Republican Party
(19:27):
has been able to exploit those frustrations to say, we
will smash those institutions for you, and then we will
know govern according to how the people want us to govern. Right,
And so they claim this popular mandate for everything they do,
and they claim that mandate in opposition to the elites
and the institutions and the experts that have you know,
(19:48):
ostensibly sort of run America for the last several decades.
And it is a critique that is targeted at both parties.
Speaker 1 (19:57):
Right.
Speaker 2 (19:57):
So one of the reasons that Donald Trump us full
is because he you know, went to war with the
traditional Republican Party, the Mitch McConnell's and the Jeb Bushes
and you know a long line of people who have
not been on board with everything that Trump wanted to do.
And so by positioning himself as both someone who takes
on the Republican Party and the Democratic Party as this
(20:19):
populist hero. You know, he's been able to sort of
reshape the Republican Party in that image more or less.
Like it hasn't worked totally obviously, but that's sort of
where he's going. And I think now that we are
in fucking year ten of this guy in our lives,
you see, you know, I think we saw this in
(20:41):
all the Republicans voting to pass his economic plan, and
there was it didn't matter what sort of ideology you
were in the Republican Party, what policy positions you had,
you just you got on board with what Donald Trump
wanted because it's Donald Trump's party.
Speaker 1 (20:55):
I mean, that's what I find so impressive in both
his terms, frankly, as is that if you look at
a list of what Republicans since Reagan really or Nixon
even really wanted, right like repeal row, lower taxes on
wealthy people, get rid of social safety net programs, trash
climate programs. Objectively speaking, like, I'm not saying this is
(21:17):
a huge lefty but this was on the list of
priorities for every Republican administration. But Trump was the one
who got it done in ways that no other Republican
could get it done, and just it's impressive oddly. I mean,
I don't agree with any of those decisions, but the
scope at which and the speed at which that has
happened under his leadership is kind of breathtaking.
Speaker 2 (21:39):
Well, and the reason it is, the reason it's happened
is because he has not really paid that much attention
to the law laws, right. I mean, here's the challenge
in talking about the parties right now, which is, our
minds are still operating in an electoral system where there's
Democrats and Republicans. They have elections and one party wins
(22:00):
and one party loses, and then you know, the.
Speaker 1 (22:02):
Next selection it switches.
Speaker 2 (22:03):
And that is still happening obviously in this country, at
least as of right now. But I do think that
Donald Trump's project is an authoritarian project, and I don't
think that's not meant to be hyperbole or to free
people out. But the idea is people get frustrated with
democratic institutions because democratic institutions are slow, and you have
(22:25):
to make sure that everyone's on board, and you have
to really get a lot of buy in from.
Speaker 1 (22:29):
A lot of people.
Speaker 2 (22:29):
You have to do the hard work of persuading people
and not just not just dominating them, and so you
don't get as much done, and people don't have patience
for not getting a lot done in part for good reasons. Right,
people are struggling. They're struggling for the cost of living
and they can't buy a house. And so when you
are living a life where you can barely afford to
(22:50):
pay the bills, and someone in Washington is telling you, well,
we're trying to fight for you, but it's going to
take some time. You got to be patient. Change happens slow,
and you're like, I don't know, I don't care about
the laws as much. If someone's going to come along
and just say well, i'll fix it tomorrow and I'll
take some action tomorrow, and maybe it's not going to
fix your life right away. Most people who bore down
(23:11):
Frump know he's bullshitting most of the time, but they're like, well,
he's doing some stuff, you know, and that I like
that he's taken some action. And maybe I don't like
all the stuff that he's doing, and maybe it hasn't
affected me yet, but you know, I like that he's
shaking shit up.
Speaker 1 (23:24):
Yeah, it brings me to being really curious about them
now with a lot of grassroots like small democratic local organizing,
even state organizing, that's been inspiring at least at least online.
And then look, I live in New York City. I've
known Zoron Mamdani since he was fourteen through his mom
because she directed me in a film, and so he's
(23:46):
been a friend for a long time, and I had
supported his State Assembly race, and you know, don't agree
with him on every single issue, but it's been phenomenally exciting.
I've been helping him with his campaign the last year
or so for mayor. I'm a heavily biased with this
type of a conversation, but to see how inspiring it's
been in to get text from friends in other cities going,
(24:08):
I'm so fucking jealous you live in New York. You
know that's a feeling that isn't just about this particular candidate.
Isn't just a feeling about like, oh, did everybody suddenly
become Democratic socialists in Brooklyn? And to me, it's more
of a reflection on the state of the Democratic Party.
So I guess my question for you since you have
you're in it every day, and you also don't live
(24:29):
in New York is what will the Democratic Party definitely
not learn from efforts like this.
Speaker 2 (24:37):
Here's my thoughts on I have. This is a take
that I've been turning around in my head on Zoran
any of It's a concern that I have right sure,
which is I see the excitement around the campaign, partly
because he has run a real grassroots campaign of which
we have not seen the likes of since probably we
(24:59):
did this with Obama. Right, and again, I'll go back
to the no longer left right split, but sort of
authoritarian democracy, right and the few versus the many, and
might makes right or everyone gets to say right. And
so Zoron ran a campaign where he went out and
talked to everyone, and you know, most famously one of
(25:22):
his first videos was talking to Trump voters about why
they voted for Donald Trump. And I think he understands
that to fight sort of an authoritarian menace, you need
the buy in of people from all different walks of life,
who don't all look the same, who don't all come
from the same place, and crucially, who don't all believe
(25:42):
the same things about politics, right, because that's the kind
of coalition you need right now. Now, A lot of
the energy behind Zorn's campaign is that same frustration with
the status quo and distrust of institutions and just this
anger that nothing ever gets done, nothing ever really changes.
(26:03):
I think the biggest danger is that he gets in there,
he tries to do a bunch of stuff, he's stymied
by Albany, and you know, because obviously he only has
a certain amount of power as the mayor of New York.
But like at that point, people don't listen to your
explanations of like separations of power and what all Bunny
can do and what the city can do, and all
(26:23):
they have a council like at this and that the
other thing.
Speaker 1 (26:25):
And then suddenly, you know, you worry.
Speaker 2 (26:27):
That people are like, oh, I had such high hopes
and then he just he didn't get to do it,
or he compromised too much, or he didn't get to
pick enough action right. And I do think that democrats
in general are going to have to figure out that
when we take power, we have to use that power
to enact change in a way that is visible to people,
(26:49):
that people can feel immediately, and that once we do
enact change, we don't tell people, Okay, we did this,
you should be good now, and look at these economic statistics.
Everything should be fine. We're all moving in the right direction.
And if you're still pissed, why are you pissed for
we did all this good stuff for you. You have
to constantly communicate that this is a struggle that doesn't
(27:11):
add right. And so if you pass some legislation that's
going to help working people a little bit, say like
that's going to provide some help to you, but that's
not enough. We still have to do X, Y and Z,
and I'm still going to be fighting against these entrench
interests constantly to continue to deliver the change that we
all want that I promised, right, And I do think
that feeling of you're communicating in which Zorin has already
(27:34):
certainly nailed in the campaign, But you're communicating constantly, you're
promising that you're going to fight for people constantly, You're
showing them that you're going to fight for them constantly,
you're delivering on that change, and then you are not
happy with how you delivered that change because it's still
not sufficient enough to you, and you're going to keep
on fighting, like I think that is the only way
(27:55):
to sort of break through and rebuild trust in this
political climate, with this information environment, which is just trash.
Speaker 1 (28:10):
Why do you think we do this? I guess I'll
put myself back in the Democratic Party category when when
I say we but the you know Trump for example, right,
you mentioned rightfully he's a reality TV star and a host.
I think we often sleep on the fact that he's
an Emmy nominated reality TV giant before he won the presidency.
(28:31):
All I hear is mainstream Democrats trying to replicate things
that he's done. So you've got like a Gavin Newsom
thinking like, well, if I shout and go on these
right wing bro podcasts, that'll solve everything, and none of
it seems authentic. Right? Why do we constantly sleep on
how media savvy Trump is and not wanting to counter
it with our own voices? Like I feel like the
(28:52):
last time that heavily biased Again, last time Democratic Party
nationally had a unique aspirational voice was was you know
you writing stuff with the president with Obama, And we
haven't really had it since then. There are inklings of
it with people like a Zoron or a Pete or
whatever you know, like them or hate them ortorically, they
do offer a bit of I think what Obama offered,
(29:13):
But why do you think we genuinely sleep on this?
And what does the future look like given that we
don't seem to have a strategy to move forward yet?
Speaker 2 (29:21):
John Carry loses in two thousand and four, and he
is a war veteran, but he was two of feet
because you know, he's from Boston and he's rich and
so so then when Carry loses, it's like, Okay, well,
now we need someone who I don't know, we just
need someone who's just like a man of the people again.
And no one would have imagined that what you needed
(29:43):
was a guy named Brack Hussein Obama from the South
side of Chicago, whose father was born in Kenya and
who spent some time in Indonesia as a child and
was from Hawaii, like you just no one, no one
going to say that. But he figured out from a
media perspective of what story he was going to tell
of how to counter the Republican narrative about America in
(30:08):
a way that was completely fresh and new and different.
And I do think that part of the issue Democrats
have faced in the Trump era is when they we
try to mimic Trump. He's got a different project than us,
and I think that people sort of underestimate this and
don't think about it enough. Like his project is to
(30:29):
keep people turned against each other, to keep people distrustful
of institutions and expertise, so that he can be the
answer to their problems. He needs to be the bully
because the reason that people support him is because they
want someone who is tough, who can just break the system.
Speaker 1 (30:49):
Right.
Speaker 2 (30:50):
And the policy agenda that follows from that is a
policy agenda where you smash the government to pieces or
take as much of it as you can, put it
under your own control to use it for your own ends.
And when Democrats win, that's not what we want to do.
That's not our policy agenda, right. We believe that we
should have democratic governance, that we should have strong institutions,
(31:13):
that institutions should make sure that it gives a voice
to the minority. We need a completely different style that
also fits with the project that we're trying to pursue,
which is stitching together a multi ethnic, multi racial democracy
in a country of over three hundred million people, where
even if we don't necessarily get along or agree, we
(31:36):
can still live in relative peace and prosperity. That is
a much harder project than what Donald Trump is pursuing,
and it requires a different strategy than the one that
Donald Trump has pursued.
Speaker 1 (31:44):
And in terms of that strategy, what have you learned
through like your podcast The Wilderness? Right, you said that
when Romney lost to Obama, the Giopede did this big
post mortem, essentially interrogetting what went wrong, creating a roadmap
to get you know, how to get back into power.
Seems to have worked, by the way, Dems didn't really
do this post twenty sixteen, and making the Wilderness was
(32:07):
one of your responses. Right, it's in season four. I
have seen zero indication from any of my friends at
any level of the mainstream Democratic Party, whether it was
our former White House friends who worked under Biden Harris
or people who work at the state level. I've just
seen zero indication from any of my friends anywhere that
(32:27):
the Democratic Party has reflected in any way this time again.
And I hope I'm wrong about that, or maybe it's
still too new and they haven't done a full post mortem.
But I guess my question is, have you seen evidence
that they've reflected and what should we be doing looking forward?
Like looking into the future.
Speaker 2 (32:47):
I've seen evidence that some people have reflected on some things.
Speaker 1 (32:52):
Okay, so no, so you've seen no evidence, so no, right, yeah,
I mean there's I mean, how much time we got.
Speaker 2 (32:57):
There's a host of issues here, right, which is I
think since you and I have been involved in politics,
there has been a push within the party, or at
least an acknowledgment, that we have to win working class
voters back.
Speaker 1 (33:12):
And there is a disagreement or.
Speaker 2 (33:15):
How you do that, right that is a Bernie Sanders
like zoron AOC style platform. Is that going to get
working class voters back? Or do you have to moderate
on certain cultural issues? But there is an agreement. I
think that we cannot be a coalition of college educated
(33:35):
voters and black voters who are college educated and non
college educated and sort of their allegiance to the Democratic
Party is basically remnants of the Civil rights era, which
is why also younger black voters are starting to drift
away from a party as well, because they don't have
the memories of older black voters. So if you have
a coalition of just college educated whites and black voters,
(33:57):
you're just not ever going to hold power in this
country again. So there's so like we started off by
losing white working class voters, you know, my first thesis.
Then we under Trump started losing working class Latino voters.
And in this last selection, we started to see black men,
younger black voters, younger voters peel away as well. Again
(34:18):
primarily for if you listen to them in focus groups
and in polls as I do, economic reasons. These people
are afraid they're not going to be able to ever
afford to live in their own house or or live
in their own apartment without having to share it. Every
demographic group that I sat down with for the Wilderness,
housing is like the top of everyone's agenda. Yeah, their
(34:41):
biggest concern. So right, so there is this this belief
that we need to bring back working class voters.
Speaker 1 (34:46):
Then the question is how do you do that? So
there is a policy debate to be had.
Speaker 2 (34:50):
And you know, I think you made the point earlier
in the conversation that people don't necessarily just vote on
policies that are going to be like good for their families.
Like I think one thing that Zoron did well is
and like and Trump did this too, Like Trump had
the wall, you got what the Wall was right. It
was just it was an easy to understand policy idea
Zorn had, Like we're going to have you know, we're
(35:12):
going to freeze the rent. Yeah, we're just going to
do that, free city buses, right, Like, these are things
that I could just say and they sat. Now are
they going to work? Is it going to be able
to enact them? I don't know, right, there's like there's
a lot of questions around that. But that's a lot
easier for people to grasp than I think the democratic
policy plans over the last decade or so, which have
been you know, maybe responsibly put together with an eye
(35:35):
toward actually getting them passed, but inscrutable to average people
who don't pay too much attention to politics. And you know,
a tax credit doesn't exactly inspire people to go out
into the streets, right, even if it is the most
sensible policy and the one that's like maybe the most
likely to get done. So we have to figure out
a policy agenda that feels bold and ambitious, because it
(35:59):
is equally is important figure out a way to pass
some of that policy agenda, at least so that people
aren't disappointed when we promise the moon and don't give
them anything. Yeah, right, So that's on the governing side.
Then there's just like the we just need charismatic leaders
in the party which has nothing. You know that this
is separate from the policy issue, which is very important,
(36:22):
but you also just need people who can communicate well
and who can talk well, and who can talk like
normal fucking people. And like I just I don't know
how many other ways I can say it. I've been
saying it.
Speaker 1 (36:33):
For ten years more now fifteen years.
Speaker 2 (36:36):
But it's just like it's we have people who are
sort of wedded to poll tested language which should be
pointing us in a direction, but not giving us an
exact script. I keep saying, like democrats always seem like
they are reading the stage directions all the time, and
it's like, stop reading the stage directions. And just you know,
(36:57):
when something happens in the news, like before you ask
your advisors, before you look on social media, before you
read any news stories about it or any opinions, just what.
Speaker 1 (37:06):
Do you think, Yeah, what do you think about what
just happened?
Speaker 2 (37:09):
Write it down then, and then talk to your advisors
and say, like, this is how I feel about this.
What do you think about me? Saying this, and maybe
they'll say, well, I wouldn't quite say it that way
or this. That's fine, but like, at least figure out
how you feel first totally. And I think you know
to Zorn's campaign, like when you go around and you
just listen to people and you spend a lot of
(37:29):
time listening more so than talking, then when it's time
to actually talk, you have a sense of confidence gained
from hearing from all kinds of people from different walks
of life over and over and over again. And if
you've had those conversations enough, then that gives you the
confidence to say what's on your mind because you have
your focus group of people that you talk to, who
(37:49):
are the voters who are going to potentially put you
in office.
Speaker 1 (37:53):
S Like Jillibrand is listening to this, rolling her eyes like, oh,
I don't want to do any of that, but they
all should. They all should.
Speaker 2 (38:01):
And you know, I also worry that the political environment
is especially now selecting for the type of people who
are super cautious, who have thought about being an elected
office since they were born, and people like you know,
quote unquote normal people, people who never would see themselves
(38:22):
running for office. Like when you look at the political
climate right now. I worry they're going to be like
why would I get myself into that totally? And to me,
I'm like, no, No, this is exactly the moment we need
people who should not necessarily belong in politics or you
wouldn't think of as as someone who'd run for office,
Like this is actually the moment we need those people
(38:44):
more than any other time.
Speaker 1 (38:45):
I agree. That's where and that's where I keep going
back to this, like, I really hope that the party
learns how to support people across the spectrum on the
left because the execution your point earlier, the execution once
these people are actually elected, is key to continuing to
get elected and frankly making people's lives better, which is
the whole purpose to begin with. Yep, this has been
(39:06):
Here we go again. I'm your host, calpen My guest
today was John Favroci. Next time.
Speaker 2 (39:11):
That's fun, dude, It's nice to chat about this. Yeah,
I set back in the news cycle and actually do
the big pictures.
Speaker 1 (39:21):
Here we go again as a production of iHeart Podcasts
and Snaffoo Media in association with New Metric Media. Our
executive producers are me Calpen Ed Helms, Mike Falbo, Melissa Martino,
Andy Kim, Pat Kelly, Chris Kelly, and Dylan Fagin. Caitlin
Fontana is our producer and writer. Dave Shumka is our
producer and editor. Additional writing from Megan tan Our consulting
(39:44):
producer is Romin Borsolino. Tory Smith is our associate producer.
Theme music by Chris Kelly, logo by Matt Gosson, Legal
review from Daniel Welsh, Caroline Johnson and Megan Halson. Special
thanks to Glenn Basner, Isaac Dunham, Adam Horn Lane, and
everyone at iHeart Podcasts, but especially Will Pearson, Carrie Lieberman
(40:05):
and Nikki Etor. Thanks for listening. See you next week.
Popular Podcasts
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.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com