July 11, 2025 • 29 mins
At NLP we countdown to the 2026 midterm elections at the end of every episode. BUT our hosts Angela Rye, Tiffany Cross, and Andrew Gillum have different opinions on the value of strategizing for the next election. That is, if Trump lets us have an election… Should we be planning for midterms or is our countdown a pipe dream?
If you’d like to submit a question, check out our tutorial video: www.instagram.com/reel/C5j_oBXLIg0/
Welcome home y’all!
—---------
We want to hear from you! Send us a video @nativelandpod and we may feature you on the podcast.
Watch full episodes of Native Land Pod here on YouTube.
Native Land Pod is brought to you by Reasoned Choice Media.
Thank you to the Native Land Pod team:
Angela Rye as host, executive producer and cofounder of Reasoned Choice Media; Tiffany Cross as host and producer, Andrew Gillum as host and producer, and Lauren Hansen as executive producer; Loren Mychael is our research producer, and Nikolas Harter is our editor and producer. Special thanks to Chris Morrow and Lenard McKelvey, co-founders of Reasoned Choice Media.
Theme music created by Daniel Laurent.
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):
Native lamb Pod is the production of iHeartRadio in partnership
with Reason Choice Media.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
Well come, well come, well come, well come, well come, welcome.
Speaker 3 (00:09):
Okay, welcome home everybody.
Speaker 4 (00:11):
This is a Native Lamppod Mini pod and Today. Because
sometimes we tend to be in gloom and doom, We're
just gonna stay in the doom, So we at the
end of most shows tell you how many days are
left to the midterms. Now, Andrew might be feeling like,
woo hoo midterms. I think me and Tiff really might
feel a way about telling y'all how many days are
(00:33):
left to the midterms, because I don't really know these
things gonna damn happen, So tif, I think that might be.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
Where you're resting.
Speaker 4 (00:41):
Even if they are gonna happen, are they gonna cheat
like they did? I still feel like they did in
the twenty twenty four election. I don't have dad. I
got a gut feeling. I'm telling about the black women
in the Holy Goes We'll be spot on. So I'm
curious to know if you guys think we should still
be telling people how many days are left.
Speaker 1 (01:02):
I say that I think it's pointless. I get so
frustrated when people say, Andrew already disagree with me. But
I'm just gonna tell you, Andrew, I think it is
pointless when people start talking to me like we just
gotta hold on for one more year then the midterms.
I'm hold on to what? What do we think the
midterms are going to change? And after going out and
(01:22):
telling everybody gotta vote, gotta votetta vote, gotta vote, and
the country I know Angela believes the election is stolen.
I can only go on what is before us, and
that is that millions of people cast ballots for this.
But I will say, Angela, the Latasha has been the
most compelling to me in giving me actual facts that
(01:43):
suggest the election is stolen. And I've really I'm hesitant
to share what she said. So y'all give me a
little bit of grace because I could be saying it
incorrectly because I don't know the exact jurisdictions. But she
was saying there were places where people would vote down
ballot completely Democrat and not the top Republican and it
happened overwhelmingly, and we should have her come on so
(02:06):
she can say it directly. But when she said that,
I'm like now, that is information to me, that is
that's factual, it's logical, and it gives you a head
scratch where yes, that does require, you know, some investigation.
But even if they did, okay, it is here now,
like what they're not gonna say, okay, takes these back seats.
We stole it, like they have already instituted this authoritarian regime.
(02:29):
And I don't know any post industrialized country that has
come this far into authoritarianism and turned around. So why
we think all of a sudden we're gonna have free
and fair elections in this country for midterms, which we've
never really had, as black folks know all too well,
and as women know all too well, we've never really
had that. But we think somehow in four hundred and
eighty days that we're going to have a better chance
(02:53):
at democracy. I just don't think so. But find Andrew,
you've been shaking your head, So go ahead and tell
me how I'm wrong.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
I think, so long as elections are still determining who
is going to be running the country, serving as your mayor,
on your school board, and your members of Congress, you
need to participate. We need to show up, and we
have to participate in the process that exists that allows
for people to do exactly what they're doing right now
to us, against us, and some would even say against
(03:21):
our will. It certainly was against mine. My will when
I voted, was for a different outcome, and it was
to preserve democracy. But the other choice was also pretty
clear to me, which was the opposite of holding democracy,
but quite frankly flipping closer to autocracy. I do think that.
(03:41):
So one thing on the evidence around the down ballot
versus up ballot. That's a trend that's happened in Florida
for decades. It's only recently shifted where people elected local
Democrats to school board, their mayors, their council in the
western part of Lord of the panhandular region. But Democratic
(04:03):
registration was really the majority registration across the Panhandle for
frankly all of our existence up to Governor Jeb Bush
being elected. But their national voting habits were always more conservative,
so they would vote for Republican presidents, Republican US senators,
(04:24):
and Democrats all the way down. The rest of the battle.
We described those folks as Dixiecrats, and Dixiecrats don't just
live in the panhandular region of Florida. Every part of
the country has those folks who registered Democrats. They are
not leaving their party registration, but their voting habits have shifted.
And then Donald Trump came along and created a permission
structure for those individuals to go from being registered ds
(04:46):
to now fully flown, grown, registered Ours, and then their
voting has now become consistent. They vote are at the
lower end and they vote are at the top end.
And I would imagine that that's a trend that exists
all over the country. But Latasha's point, if we're going
to find irregularities in the election system, it is going
(05:08):
to happen at a precinct by precinct level in each
county and every you know, and all over the country,
but both very specifically in states that are considered basically
beil weather states or states that could flip either Republican
or Democrat from cycle to cycle. But the ability for
(05:28):
someone to hold sales steal an election by flipping a switch,
and if impacted the entire country, it is less likely
given the decentralized nature of our election system, which is
run county to county to county, and I mean not
in but just make this final point, which is simply say,
(05:48):
I think we have to be really careful and responsible
with how we talk about our elections systems, because it's
the only thing that people can have faith in if
they're exercizing the process of going out of their house
down to a precinct or in their house in filling
out an absentee ballot and letting their voices be heard.
(06:09):
Because I don't know too many people who willingly participate
in what they find to be a futile experience. Most people,
if I'm going to take my time, energy effort, in
some cases money to fuel a gas tank or otherwise,
it better have an outcome on the other end of it,
(06:30):
hopefully in the direction that I would like it to go,
but an outcome nonetheless that can be trusted. And if
we erode that process, we think we have problems now
with the couch winning quote unquote, we're really going to
exacerbate a problem of people deciding to just check completely
a wholesale out of elections because they don't believe that
(06:50):
they're legal, that they're fair, or that it will count.
Let alone the debate around whether it matters because of
what happens once people get elected, but whether it will count.
And I think that create that that crisis of confidence
and a system opens up a whole new barrel for
us to have to fight.
Speaker 1 (07:08):
I think that's all completely fair. I just want to
punctuate the point that you made around being careful how
we talk about it. Something that you said that is
in real time made me reconsider about midterms is when
we talk about those down ballot races, when in your
explanation of Dixiecrats, yes, those down ballot races may not
(07:29):
be impacted by impropriety. You know, this is like school
board elections, city council members. So at no point am
I ever discouraging people from participating in the process. I'm
really speaking more from a federal perspective. I don't know
what midterm elections might change. Even should Democrats take seize
power of the House and or the Senate. I'd be
(07:51):
curious about what things that have happened that that could
actually stop. I think there's a big tent in the party.
There are conservative Democrats. So that's really my perspect in
terms of your explanation on malfeasance in the past election,
I just want to be clear there too, I am
not saying the election was stolen. I'm not saying it wasn't.
My only thing is before the responsibility for me personally,
(08:15):
the responsibility I have before an audience. I would not
say the election is stolen if I have not well
researched it and said, here is the data chain that
leads me to that. So I'm simply sharing what Latasha
said to me, which is why, Yeah, I know, I
just want to be clear for the audience, because I
you know, I want them to understand this is what
(08:35):
I'm told. I have not personally gone down that rabbit
hole to say, oh, yeah, I see how this can happen.
I'm curious when you say stuff like county by county,
because you're not the only person to say that. I
think Roland Martin did a segment on his shows that
I haven't watched that I should, and Roland Martin is
in a stude journalist, so I don't know what he did.
But a lot of people were saying, oh, Roland Martin
(08:55):
explored a report by somebody that gave them pause on
the election. Those are the things that will entice me
to say, okay, well, let me look at the information.
I don't know if the election was stolen. I just
think that some of us, maybe not you, Angela, but
there are some people out there who are so traumatized
at the pronouncement of white supremacy in this country that
(09:17):
we can't even fathom it. That were like, there is
no way y'all went out and put this half witted
political idiot back in office after he said every racist,
awful thing. There is no chance that you all could
have done that, And that is where I'm torn. I'd
rather the election be stolen than to know that the
majority of people in this country right felt this way.
(09:38):
So I don't know, And I want.
Speaker 4 (09:40):
To back into this a little bit because I had
to think about, like I know that I did some
research on the other side of the election, and there
were definitely reports that were coming out from election experts
on why this is a very likely phenomenon. So I
went back and looked. There was a lot of discussion
around county level manipulations. When we talk about mid term elections,
(10:01):
we're talking about local state elections, and then of course
our members of Congress that are elected in those off
year elections, as well as House of Representatives and senators
in some instances, I think it's a third normally that
are up for election. There were five states that one
entity said needed investigation into whether or not there was
(10:22):
any count county level manipulation. Please look these up so
that you're not just going off my smart elections one
I'm about to I'm about to smart elections is one.
Election Truth Alliance looked at Clark County, Nevada. The drawing
off rate in Clark County, Nevada was astonishing to them.
(10:43):
The way that they would have they flipped from the
presidential nominee, the two presidential candidates to who they voted
for in the Senate was astonishing to Election Truth Alliance.
Speaker 1 (10:55):
Additionally, for this as a quock question, when you say
the drop off, you're saying that people are voting basically
what Latasha was saying, that at the top they're voting
Republican and down ballot.
Speaker 4 (11:06):
Ballant as Democrats. Yes, no, yes, even between the fads
even yes, yes, exactly. And then the other thing is,
and I forgot about this comment, but Donald Trump said
right after inauguration that Elon Musk understood the Pennsylvania voting
machines on a local level better than anyone and they
(11:29):
ended up winning by a landslide, which caused a lot
of alarm as well. So if you have someone saying
that there are five states or an entity that studies
this five states from an election integrity standpoint that need
to be looked into because it looks like there could
be some county by county manipulation. You have the President
making this pronouncement about Pennsylvania voting machines and Elon Musk,
(11:51):
and you have this Clark County analysis. And I remember
going back and looking at what the Attorney General put
out as well, Stephen horse Ford, to be fair, because
when I raised was Stephen Horsford, he was like, well.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
The representative of Clark County, uh huh, Las Vegas.
Speaker 4 (12:08):
And he said, well, they've been looking into this for
some time. It wasn't about this election, but it was
about this election.
Speaker 3 (12:15):
So I'm not.
Speaker 4 (12:15):
Sure what the dis like, what the issue was, And
I can't remember when how he responded to my response. Know,
they are talking about the twenty four election, not twenty two,
not twenty It was this year. But they did make
an analysis and have data from the year prior or,
the presidential prior and the one before that. And they
show how there was a more significant drop off like
(12:37):
ten percent from Harris to Jackie Rosen.
Speaker 3 (12:41):
Two women.
Speaker 4 (12:41):
So you also can't say, well, it was a woman thing.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
Two women on the.
Speaker 4 (12:45):
Versus YEP, versus what it was in twenty twenty versus
twenty sixteen.
Speaker 1 (12:51):
Pennsylvania.
Speaker 3 (12:53):
Yeah, I need to go back, and Nevada was one.
Pennsylvania was one.
Speaker 1 (12:59):
The interesting thing about those there are two swing states.
Speaker 2 (13:02):
They were a Democrat, I would imagine then Michigan.
Speaker 3 (13:07):
I don't want to even imagine you go back and
pull on.
Speaker 2 (13:11):
But while you're looking that up, Ange, I'll just say
in Florida and my race for governor, we had the
US Senate race at the same time, which of course
had a white male nominee Democrat on my side, and
then my race obviously black male Democrat, and there was
about a point difference. And when I say a point,
I'm talking about like seventy thousand votes. Who were people
(13:33):
who were comfortable voting for a Democrat for the US Senate,
a white male Democrat for the US Senate, and who
then and the race for governor appeared to have switched
from their Democratic ballot to choose the Republican nominee. What
makes it alarming for outside groups who are looking at
these elections is if you see, usually these habits of
(13:57):
flipping or going back and forth between D and R
are sort of well laced. There's a history of it.
There's a way in which you can go back and
explain this to be a voting pattern of a particular area,
be it a whole state or congressional districts, so on
and so forth. What is anomalous is if there is
no history, yet you find a significant difference, especially at
(14:20):
same levels. Right, so you're talking about a statewide race.
A Senate is a statewide race. A governor is a
state wide race. So you're looking at two comparable races.
But then there is a difference between whether folks so
for a Democrat or a Republican in those seats and
most states, you can vote an entire Democratic line or
(14:40):
you can vote an entire Republican line, which means anyone
who is running for partisan office and they are a Republican,
your ballot will choose them, and the same for Democrat exactly.
And then there is there are the people who go
back and forth. Even when you have to make individual
selections back and forth. Overwhelmingly, people vote party line ballots.
(15:02):
That's where anomalies come from when folks don't do that.
And you see a difference between a statewide race where democrats,
the Democrat got four million votes and the Republican got
four point one million votes. But it then switches to
a governor's race and the Democrat gets three point nine
million and the Republican got four point two million. That
(15:22):
is a pretty significant difference without a trait. We have
to identify what the trait was that made the difference possible.
In twenty sixteen, this confounded a lot of us because
we had not seen the kind of drop off that
we'd seen before between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump and
the races that came below them, with folks choosing between
(15:43):
Democrat Republican. And what we found in later research is
that Trump was able to hyper activate the white vote turnout,
and he did the same in this last election.
Speaker 1 (15:53):
In this last election, that is the thing.
Speaker 2 (15:56):
Turnout of white voters about turn out totally skewed. It
threw all the polling off, of course, but it also
throws out a lot of these what do you call
those closing numbers at the end of the day they
say exit poled numbers and that kind of thing, which
because these people a lot of practice around exit polling,
and if they were, they're still not giving an honest answer,
(16:18):
and so it confounded a lot of us.
Speaker 3 (16:29):
Okay, so just really quick.
Speaker 4 (16:31):
So now I went to the Smart Elections thing and
they have a chart. I'm just going to send you
all the link. And they examined seventeen states, and the
swing states had the most significant drop off versus the
non swing states for reasons.
Speaker 3 (16:46):
We understand there are swing states for a reason.
Speaker 4 (16:48):
But the swing states were Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania,
and Wisconsin. And then there are non swing states where
there was also drop off, but it was no where
near I mean it is. It is astonishing. So I'm
gonna send you guys to craft.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
Send it to me. I remained unconvinced to be honest.
I mean, I and my challenge is when I'm citing
someone else's research, I want to know, like, how you
got this research. And then I got to talk to
five other people explain to me because this is what
they said they got how they got the research. Andrew,
you'd be one of those people like I don't read
cross tabs and feel all that stuff, Like I don't
know what I can look at the numbers, and I
(17:25):
remember I was at Michael Harriet's house when the new
Pew data drops and I was asking him to explain
it to me, and we talked about it in our chat.
Because even the idea, I know we disagree here, Angela,
but even the idea that the couch won, I don't
know that that's true, Like the data just does not
support it, but it's always my So then the couch
wins every year like that. When you said that that's
(17:45):
not that craasy number, that's the part that I actually,
I think it would be nice for us as a
country to get to a place where democracy was winning
enough that one candidate at least superseded that ninety million number. Yeah,
to me, that's that's I think, And specifically about this
idea that in this election it was so crazy because
(18:07):
ninety million people stayed home, and when you look at
over all the cycles, that is pretty consistent with how
many people stayed home. And then when you dig deeper
and you disaggregate this data, you go down each rabbit
hole individually, and that requires a collection of research, and
it's boring, right, It's like boring to sit there and
it takes hours and days to get to ask people.
But when you go across that and look at all
(18:28):
of it, and it'saggregated by race, this dude, the same
way that Obama brought out the highest number of black
voters and the lowest number of white voters, Donald Trump
ignited a movement among white people. And that is my challenge. Yes,
that is my challenge here because if that's what it
took for you all to participate in this here democracy,
(18:50):
and you were motivated. They were united in our destruction,
they are united in our failures in this country. They're
united and making sure that we never even get what
they have or come close. And they are so motivated
by that that they put this man back in office.
That is the part I have challenged, and I understand
why people are like, no, this can't be right, Like
(19:11):
this can't be true. I just have not seen all
the depth the New York Times analysis, Pew, all the
data I've looked at, nothing has supported a that the
couch has won, b that the election was stolen, even
in these swing states, that you're talking about. I remain open.
You know, I'm not saying this with certainty, but I
just feel some level of disgust that these people have
(19:36):
that they were motivated by him to come out. I
would love to hear that the election is stolen, because
I'm like, oh, these people, we have to cohabitate with
our fellow countrymen. They're actually not pieces of shit, and
they're actually not so bad. There's only a small number.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
No.
Speaker 1 (19:50):
What this election showed me is, yeah, ancient chains, they
are still awful people who voted for this man because
they don't like you and they don't like brown people.
That's I'm experiencing it.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
I think we can if we talked about narcissism, it
would be a narcissist thing to say if we believe
that folks were motivated exclusively by why, Because I think
it's probably more complicated than simple. I think it can
be racist. Oh no, no, I'm not giving racist. I
think you can be racist, have racist belief in tendencies
(20:25):
ninety nine percent of your day in time or one
hundred percent of your day in time, and still have
other motivations for doing a thing beyond just being racist.
Is what I'm saying it doesn't make them better people.
It just means that they had motivations forgetting out and voting.
And by the way, a motivation had to be first
of all, when Barack Obama ran, these same white folks
(20:47):
could have been motivated equally like that Ma's Gillham that
that movie where at the end in California, like the
polls will be closing and whatever you know, Chris Rock
I think is the main character of that movie, and
they everybody's pulled out their driveway and rush into the
polls to go and vote to make sure the black
man didn't win. But just as they were motivated to
see Donald Trump, when they could have equally been motivated
(21:08):
to prevent a black man from winning the presidency. I mean,
in real time, they could have showed up in unprecedented
numbers to stop that from happening, and couldn't do it
every time, quite frankly up to now and probably beyond
for several election cycles, because that's just where the numbers
are when it comes to electoral performance. That if white
folks wanted to vote and vote the way they vote
(21:32):
right now, which is white men overwhelmingly Republican and white
women consistently over a majority Republican So if they could
have done that, then if this was only going to
be about race, but they didn't. But they didn't do that,
then they did not prevent that from happening. And they
could have, and they could have done it even with
fewer of them showing up than showed up to support Trump,
(21:54):
and in this case, they wanted Trump. And I will
just I'm layering on this that in addition to not
wanting a black woman there, it can also be that
there's some other things that were being communicated in that.
Speaker 1 (22:07):
Missing voted against her or they voted for him either
and both make them racist.
Speaker 2 (22:14):
Series it's a difference without distinction. Completely agree. All I'm
saying is is that if that were the only motivator
by itself, then why didn't that motivator also keep Barack
Obama from office?
Speaker 1 (22:27):
They weren't engaged then, And.
Speaker 4 (22:31):
Since that's not true, some of them, some of them
were voted, were voting to demonstrate they weren't racist. I'm looking,
I'm trying to see where I'm missing this too, but
is then looked up In twenty four ninety million people
didn't vote in twenty eighty million people didn't vote, and
so it was the highest turnout and voter participation since
nineteen o eight, and twenty four was the second highest
(22:51):
since nineteen sixty. In twenty sixteen, one hundred million people
didn't vote, and I'm trying to figure out what the
twenty twelve and two thousand and eight numbers are tour,
which is fine, but I don't remember it and sometimes
might not remember it either.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
I'm not saying that, I'm just saying I don't just
so people know I'm not googling something during the show,
because sometimes numbers are.
Speaker 4 (23:15):
I am googling it during the show because I'm trying
to figure out where the breakdown is. I think what
I was trying to get to is at the end
of the day, what we know is voter participation is
not where it should be in this country, and as
a result, that means that democracy has consistently been failing
people because it doesn't feel like people power. So people
are not going to lean into a system where they
(23:36):
do not feel represented, which brings us full circle to
the point of this show. Because I know we are
supposed to be leaving like really soon and closing out
it really soon.
Speaker 3 (23:46):
What we are struggling with.
Speaker 4 (23:48):
I think all in all is telling people counting down
to the days where their circumstances are going to dramatically change,
counting down to the days where a midterm election means
that all of sudden, now things are going to be
sky as blue, things are great. That is not how
it's feeling, because even while we had a reprieve from
twenty sixteen to twenty twenty, things still haven't drastically changed
(24:11):
for a number of people in our communities. And so
while we count down, let us also be intentional about
the work that needs to shift that is in our
power to do, and be recruiting people that can dramatically
change circumstances because they are showing real courage. Whether it's
one hundred million or eighty million or ninety million, tip,
it is too many people who are sitting out of
(24:32):
participating in this democracy, and that means that the democracy
has to change. I think at the verities we can
all agree on that point.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
I can definitely agree. Yeah, none of us ever disagree.
My only point was to present it like ninety million
people didn't vote this time, as though that was some
sort of anomalycessys crisis that's when I say crisis that
has happened over a lot of election cycles unfortunately in
the country.
Speaker 2 (24:58):
And my question is with you to.
Speaker 4 (25:04):
So, yeah, let's let's get let's fix that.
Speaker 2 (25:11):
Find the idea of the couch one. It's good on
a shirt, but it doesn't have effectual impact in the
sense that when the couch wins, then the couch gets
to decide what happens. And in our democracy, the one
who actually wins gets to decide the policy. And so
when the couch starts laying people off and federal agencies
(25:34):
all throughout the land, then they won. But so long
as they're there. The in the sense that more people
sat the couch than got out and voted for any
one particular candidate, it is. It is a cool observation. However,
the effect of winning to me is you governed. Winning
(25:56):
means you're in charge. Winning means you get to do
the thing that you're inclined to do. And unfortunately the
couch didn't win because I don't think the couch would
have done what Donald Trump has been doing.
Speaker 3 (26:07):
I think.
Speaker 2 (26:10):
I think it should absorb as much time as we've
given the couches one, because it is semantical, and it
has created a debate that I think again ends up
talking about numbers rather than what is I think a greater, bigger, larger,
comprehensive point, and that is around a democracy and a
(26:31):
system of representative democracy that has failed so miserably that
the majority of people are choosing I will stay out
rather than have an impact on which one of these
fools end up serving.
Speaker 1 (26:45):
This is a conversation. No, that's fine. This is a
conversation that I think will be ongoing because I don't
think we've resolved. Do we need to start telling people?
Do we need to continue to tell people how many
days until midterms? So I guess for now we'll keep
doing it. But what I love about this conversation I
have to be honest, all three of us feel very differently,
and I surmised that among our audience that there are
(27:08):
groups of each like. We each have followers who are like, yes,
what Angela is saying, Angela's right? Yes, what Ti He's saying? Yes,
what Andrew was saying?
Speaker 2 (27:15):
Occasionally a good point, yes, even in your whole.
Speaker 1 (27:21):
Like narcissism shade that you threw to me. I actually
take that point and think about it. I think about it.
Speaker 2 (27:28):
I said it's narcissistic. Believe that.
Speaker 1 (27:30):
I think that's agree.
Speaker 2 (27:33):
All the.
Speaker 4 (27:35):
Narcissists was thrown around a lot in the show before
in this show, and I.
Speaker 2 (27:39):
Just want to because you got called it for yourself
asking about tips too.
Speaker 4 (27:44):
I'm just saying, we like that should be the default,
Like y'all need to stop watching the social media videos,
like let me tell you how to find a narcissist,
like everything is it the way.
Speaker 3 (27:54):
You're not actually believe it's actually.
Speaker 1 (27:59):
But let us know it's it's over killed.
Speaker 4 (28:02):
And I do think that we have to do the
hard work of unpacking again. We might have some flat side, Yeah,
trying to We're just trying to solve. Friends, We're just
trying to solve.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
Don't take up space with me either.
Speaker 1 (28:16):
We must hold space.
Speaker 3 (28:19):
Have a boundary. You have a boundary.
Speaker 1 (28:21):
We have the boundaries, all the therapy words. Okay with that,
I'm running. Y'all can keep going, but I'm kind I'm out.
Thank y'all for listening. There are we'll know how many
days the midterm alexis because we don't never don't have
to anyway. We will see y'all next time. Welcome home, y'all.
Speaker 4 (28:54):
Native Lampard is a production of iHeart Radio and partnership
with Reason Choice Media.
Speaker 3 (28:59):
For more podcas we ask for iHeartRadio visits, iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Native lamb Pod is the production of iHeartRadio in partnership
with Reason Choice Media.
Speaker 2 (00:05):
Well come, well come, well come, well come, well come, welcome.
Speaker 3 (00:09):
Okay, welcome home everybody.
Speaker 4 (00:11):
This is a Native Lamppod Mini pod and Today. Because
sometimes we tend to be in gloom and doom, We're
just gonna stay in the doom, So we at the
end of most shows tell you how many days are
left to the midterms. Now, Andrew might be feeling like,
woo hoo midterms. I think me and Tiff really might
feel a way about telling y'all how many days are
(00:33):
left to the midterms, because I don't really know these
things gonna damn happen, So tif, I think that might be.
Speaker 3 (00:39):
Where you're resting.
Speaker 4 (00:41):
Even if they are gonna happen, are they gonna cheat
like they did? I still feel like they did in
the twenty twenty four election. I don't have dad. I
got a gut feeling. I'm telling about the black women
in the Holy Goes We'll be spot on. So I'm
curious to know if you guys think we should still
be telling people how many days are left.
Speaker 1 (01:02):
I say that I think it's pointless. I get so
frustrated when people say, Andrew already disagree with me. But
I'm just gonna tell you, Andrew, I think it is
pointless when people start talking to me like we just
gotta hold on for one more year then the midterms.
I'm hold on to what? What do we think the
midterms are going to change? And after going out and
(01:22):
telling everybody gotta vote, gotta votetta vote, gotta vote, and
the country I know Angela believes the election is stolen.
I can only go on what is before us, and
that is that millions of people cast ballots for this.
But I will say, Angela, the Latasha has been the
most compelling to me in giving me actual facts that
(01:43):
suggest the election is stolen. And I've really I'm hesitant
to share what she said. So y'all give me a
little bit of grace because I could be saying it
incorrectly because I don't know the exact jurisdictions. But she
was saying there were places where people would vote down
ballot completely Democrat and not the top Republican and it
happened overwhelmingly, and we should have her come on so
(02:06):
she can say it directly. But when she said that,
I'm like now, that is information to me, that is
that's factual, it's logical, and it gives you a head
scratch where yes, that does require, you know, some investigation.
But even if they did, okay, it is here now,
like what they're not gonna say, okay, takes these back seats.
We stole it, like they have already instituted this authoritarian regime.
(02:29):
And I don't know any post industrialized country that has
come this far into authoritarianism and turned around. So why
we think all of a sudden we're gonna have free
and fair elections in this country for midterms, which we've
never really had, as black folks know all too well,
and as women know all too well, we've never really
had that. But we think somehow in four hundred and
eighty days that we're going to have a better chance
(02:53):
at democracy. I just don't think so. But find Andrew,
you've been shaking your head, So go ahead and tell
me how I'm wrong.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
I think, so long as elections are still determining who
is going to be running the country, serving as your mayor,
on your school board, and your members of Congress, you
need to participate. We need to show up, and we
have to participate in the process that exists that allows
for people to do exactly what they're doing right now
to us, against us, and some would even say against
(03:21):
our will. It certainly was against mine. My will when
I voted, was for a different outcome, and it was
to preserve democracy. But the other choice was also pretty
clear to me, which was the opposite of holding democracy,
but quite frankly flipping closer to autocracy. I do think that.
(03:41):
So one thing on the evidence around the down ballot
versus up ballot. That's a trend that's happened in Florida
for decades. It's only recently shifted where people elected local
Democrats to school board, their mayors, their council in the
western part of Lord of the panhandular region. But Democratic
(04:03):
registration was really the majority registration across the Panhandle for
frankly all of our existence up to Governor Jeb Bush
being elected. But their national voting habits were always more conservative,
so they would vote for Republican presidents, Republican US senators,
(04:24):
and Democrats all the way down. The rest of the battle.
We described those folks as Dixiecrats, and Dixiecrats don't just
live in the panhandular region of Florida. Every part of
the country has those folks who registered Democrats. They are
not leaving their party registration, but their voting habits have shifted.
And then Donald Trump came along and created a permission
structure for those individuals to go from being registered ds
(04:46):
to now fully flown, grown, registered Ours, and then their
voting has now become consistent. They vote are at the
lower end and they vote are at the top end.
And I would imagine that that's a trend that exists
all over the country. But Latasha's point, if we're going
to find irregularities in the election system, it is going
(05:08):
to happen at a precinct by precinct level in each
county and every you know, and all over the country,
but both very specifically in states that are considered basically
beil weather states or states that could flip either Republican
or Democrat from cycle to cycle. But the ability for
(05:28):
someone to hold sales steal an election by flipping a switch,
and if impacted the entire country, it is less likely
given the decentralized nature of our election system, which is
run county to county to county, and I mean not
in but just make this final point, which is simply say,
(05:48):
I think we have to be really careful and responsible
with how we talk about our elections systems, because it's
the only thing that people can have faith in if
they're exercizing the process of going out of their house
down to a precinct or in their house in filling
out an absentee ballot and letting their voices be heard.
(06:09):
Because I don't know too many people who willingly participate
in what they find to be a futile experience. Most people,
if I'm going to take my time, energy effort, in
some cases money to fuel a gas tank or otherwise,
it better have an outcome on the other end of it,
(06:30):
hopefully in the direction that I would like it to go,
but an outcome nonetheless that can be trusted. And if
we erode that process, we think we have problems now
with the couch winning quote unquote, we're really going to
exacerbate a problem of people deciding to just check completely
a wholesale out of elections because they don't believe that
(06:50):
they're legal, that they're fair, or that it will count.
Let alone the debate around whether it matters because of
what happens once people get elected, but whether it will count.
And I think that create that that crisis of confidence
and a system opens up a whole new barrel for
us to have to fight.
Speaker 1 (07:08):
I think that's all completely fair. I just want to
punctuate the point that you made around being careful how
we talk about it. Something that you said that is
in real time made me reconsider about midterms is when
we talk about those down ballot races, when in your
explanation of Dixiecrats, yes, those down ballot races may not
(07:29):
be impacted by impropriety. You know, this is like school
board elections, city council members. So at no point am
I ever discouraging people from participating in the process. I'm
really speaking more from a federal perspective. I don't know
what midterm elections might change. Even should Democrats take seize
power of the House and or the Senate. I'd be
(07:51):
curious about what things that have happened that that could
actually stop. I think there's a big tent in the party.
There are conservative Democrats. So that's really my perspect in
terms of your explanation on malfeasance in the past election,
I just want to be clear there too, I am
not saying the election was stolen. I'm not saying it wasn't.
My only thing is before the responsibility for me personally,
(08:15):
the responsibility I have before an audience. I would not
say the election is stolen if I have not well
researched it and said, here is the data chain that
leads me to that. So I'm simply sharing what Latasha
said to me, which is why, Yeah, I know, I
just want to be clear for the audience, because I
you know, I want them to understand this is what
(08:35):
I'm told. I have not personally gone down that rabbit
hole to say, oh, yeah, I see how this can happen.
I'm curious when you say stuff like county by county,
because you're not the only person to say that. I
think Roland Martin did a segment on his shows that
I haven't watched that I should, and Roland Martin is
in a stude journalist, so I don't know what he did.
But a lot of people were saying, oh, Roland Martin
(08:55):
explored a report by somebody that gave them pause on
the election. Those are the things that will entice me
to say, okay, well, let me look at the information.
I don't know if the election was stolen. I just
think that some of us, maybe not you, Angela, but
there are some people out there who are so traumatized
at the pronouncement of white supremacy in this country that
(09:17):
we can't even fathom it. That were like, there is
no way y'all went out and put this half witted
political idiot back in office after he said every racist,
awful thing. There is no chance that you all could
have done that, And that is where I'm torn. I'd
rather the election be stolen than to know that the
majority of people in this country right felt this way.
(09:38):
So I don't know, And I want.
Speaker 4 (09:40):
To back into this a little bit because I had
to think about, like I know that I did some
research on the other side of the election, and there
were definitely reports that were coming out from election experts
on why this is a very likely phenomenon. So I
went back and looked. There was a lot of discussion
around county level manipulations. When we talk about mid term elections,
(10:01):
we're talking about local state elections, and then of course
our members of Congress that are elected in those off
year elections, as well as House of Representatives and senators
in some instances, I think it's a third normally that
are up for election. There were five states that one
entity said needed investigation into whether or not there was
(10:22):
any count county level manipulation. Please look these up so
that you're not just going off my smart elections one
I'm about to I'm about to smart elections is one.
Election Truth Alliance looked at Clark County, Nevada. The drawing
off rate in Clark County, Nevada was astonishing to them.
(10:43):
The way that they would have they flipped from the
presidential nominee, the two presidential candidates to who they voted
for in the Senate was astonishing to Election Truth Alliance.
Speaker 1 (10:55):
Additionally, for this as a quock question, when you say
the drop off, you're saying that people are voting basically
what Latasha was saying, that at the top they're voting
Republican and down ballot.
Speaker 4 (11:06):
Ballant as Democrats. Yes, no, yes, even between the fads
even yes, yes, exactly. And then the other thing is,
and I forgot about this comment, but Donald Trump said
right after inauguration that Elon Musk understood the Pennsylvania voting
machines on a local level better than anyone and they
(11:29):
ended up winning by a landslide, which caused a lot
of alarm as well. So if you have someone saying
that there are five states or an entity that studies
this five states from an election integrity standpoint that need
to be looked into because it looks like there could
be some county by county manipulation. You have the President
making this pronouncement about Pennsylvania voting machines and Elon Musk,
(11:51):
and you have this Clark County analysis. And I remember
going back and looking at what the Attorney General put
out as well, Stephen horse Ford, to be fair, because
when I raised was Stephen Horsford, he was like, well.
Speaker 1 (12:04):
The representative of Clark County, uh huh, Las Vegas.
Speaker 4 (12:08):
And he said, well, they've been looking into this for
some time. It wasn't about this election, but it was
about this election.
Speaker 3 (12:15):
So I'm not.
Speaker 4 (12:15):
Sure what the dis like, what the issue was, And
I can't remember when how he responded to my response. Know,
they are talking about the twenty four election, not twenty two,
not twenty It was this year. But they did make
an analysis and have data from the year prior or,
the presidential prior and the one before that. And they
show how there was a more significant drop off like
(12:37):
ten percent from Harris to Jackie Rosen.
Speaker 3 (12:41):
Two women.
Speaker 4 (12:41):
So you also can't say, well, it was a woman thing.
Speaker 1 (12:44):
Two women on the.
Speaker 4 (12:45):
Versus YEP, versus what it was in twenty twenty versus
twenty sixteen.
Speaker 1 (12:51):
Pennsylvania.
Speaker 3 (12:53):
Yeah, I need to go back, and Nevada was one.
Pennsylvania was one.
Speaker 1 (12:59):
The interesting thing about those there are two swing states.
Speaker 2 (13:02):
They were a Democrat, I would imagine then Michigan.
Speaker 3 (13:07):
I don't want to even imagine you go back and
pull on.
Speaker 2 (13:11):
But while you're looking that up, Ange, I'll just say
in Florida and my race for governor, we had the
US Senate race at the same time, which of course
had a white male nominee Democrat on my side, and
then my race obviously black male Democrat, and there was
about a point difference. And when I say a point,
I'm talking about like seventy thousand votes. Who were people
(13:33):
who were comfortable voting for a Democrat for the US Senate,
a white male Democrat for the US Senate, and who
then and the race for governor appeared to have switched
from their Democratic ballot to choose the Republican nominee. What
makes it alarming for outside groups who are looking at
these elections is if you see, usually these habits of
(13:57):
flipping or going back and forth between D and R
are sort of well laced. There's a history of it.
There's a way in which you can go back and
explain this to be a voting pattern of a particular area,
be it a whole state or congressional districts, so on
and so forth. What is anomalous is if there is
no history, yet you find a significant difference, especially at
(14:20):
same levels. Right, so you're talking about a statewide race.
A Senate is a statewide race. A governor is a
state wide race. So you're looking at two comparable races.
But then there is a difference between whether folks so
for a Democrat or a Republican in those seats and
most states, you can vote an entire Democratic line or
(14:40):
you can vote an entire Republican line, which means anyone
who is running for partisan office and they are a Republican,
your ballot will choose them, and the same for Democrat exactly.
And then there is there are the people who go
back and forth. Even when you have to make individual
selections back and forth. Overwhelmingly, people vote party line ballots.
(15:02):
That's where anomalies come from when folks don't do that.
And you see a difference between a statewide race where democrats,
the Democrat got four million votes and the Republican got
four point one million votes. But it then switches to
a governor's race and the Democrat gets three point nine
million and the Republican got four point two million. That
(15:22):
is a pretty significant difference without a trait. We have
to identify what the trait was that made the difference possible.
In twenty sixteen, this confounded a lot of us because
we had not seen the kind of drop off that
we'd seen before between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump and
the races that came below them, with folks choosing between
(15:43):
Democrat Republican. And what we found in later research is
that Trump was able to hyper activate the white vote turnout,
and he did the same in this last election.
Speaker 1 (15:53):
In this last election, that is the thing.
Speaker 2 (15:56):
Turnout of white voters about turn out totally skewed. It
threw all the polling off, of course, but it also
throws out a lot of these what do you call
those closing numbers at the end of the day they
say exit poled numbers and that kind of thing, which
because these people a lot of practice around exit polling,
and if they were, they're still not giving an honest answer,
(16:18):
and so it confounded a lot of us.
Speaker 3 (16:29):
Okay, so just really quick.
Speaker 4 (16:31):
So now I went to the Smart Elections thing and
they have a chart. I'm just going to send you
all the link. And they examined seventeen states, and the
swing states had the most significant drop off versus the
non swing states for reasons.
Speaker 3 (16:46):
We understand there are swing states for a reason.
Speaker 4 (16:48):
But the swing states were Arizona, Michigan, Nevada, North Carolina, Pennsylvania,
and Wisconsin. And then there are non swing states where
there was also drop off, but it was no where
near I mean it is. It is astonishing. So I'm
gonna send you guys to craft.
Speaker 1 (17:05):
Send it to me. I remained unconvinced to be honest.
I mean, I and my challenge is when I'm citing
someone else's research, I want to know, like, how you
got this research. And then I got to talk to
five other people explain to me because this is what
they said they got how they got the research. Andrew,
you'd be one of those people like I don't read
cross tabs and feel all that stuff, Like I don't
know what I can look at the numbers, and I
(17:25):
remember I was at Michael Harriet's house when the new
Pew data drops and I was asking him to explain
it to me, and we talked about it in our chat.
Because even the idea, I know we disagree here, Angela,
but even the idea that the couch won, I don't
know that that's true, Like the data just does not
support it, but it's always my So then the couch
wins every year like that. When you said that that's
(17:45):
not that craasy number, that's the part that I actually,
I think it would be nice for us as a
country to get to a place where democracy was winning
enough that one candidate at least superseded that ninety million number. Yeah,
to me, that's that's I think, And specifically about this
idea that in this election it was so crazy because
(18:07):
ninety million people stayed home, and when you look at
over all the cycles, that is pretty consistent with how
many people stayed home. And then when you dig deeper
and you disaggregate this data, you go down each rabbit
hole individually, and that requires a collection of research, and
it's boring, right, It's like boring to sit there and
it takes hours and days to get to ask people.
But when you go across that and look at all
(18:28):
of it, and it'saggregated by race, this dude, the same
way that Obama brought out the highest number of black
voters and the lowest number of white voters, Donald Trump
ignited a movement among white people. And that is my challenge. Yes,
that is my challenge here because if that's what it
took for you all to participate in this here democracy,
(18:50):
and you were motivated. They were united in our destruction,
they are united in our failures in this country. They're
united and making sure that we never even get what
they have or come close. And they are so motivated
by that that they put this man back in office.
That is the part I have challenged, and I understand
why people are like, no, this can't be right, Like
(19:11):
this can't be true. I just have not seen all
the depth the New York Times analysis, Pew, all the
data I've looked at, nothing has supported a that the
couch has won, b that the election was stolen, even
in these swing states, that you're talking about. I remain open.
You know, I'm not saying this with certainty, but I
just feel some level of disgust that these people have
(19:36):
that they were motivated by him to come out. I
would love to hear that the election is stolen, because
I'm like, oh, these people, we have to cohabitate with
our fellow countrymen. They're actually not pieces of shit, and
they're actually not so bad. There's only a small number.
Speaker 2 (19:49):
No.
Speaker 1 (19:50):
What this election showed me is, yeah, ancient chains, they
are still awful people who voted for this man because
they don't like you and they don't like brown people.
That's I'm experiencing it.
Speaker 2 (20:01):
I think we can if we talked about narcissism, it
would be a narcissist thing to say if we believe
that folks were motivated exclusively by why, Because I think
it's probably more complicated than simple. I think it can
be racist. Oh no, no, I'm not giving racist. I
think you can be racist, have racist belief in tendencies
(20:25):
ninety nine percent of your day in time or one
hundred percent of your day in time, and still have
other motivations for doing a thing beyond just being racist.
Is what I'm saying it doesn't make them better people.
It just means that they had motivations forgetting out and voting.
And by the way, a motivation had to be first
of all, when Barack Obama ran, these same white folks
(20:47):
could have been motivated equally like that Ma's Gillham that
that movie where at the end in California, like the
polls will be closing and whatever you know, Chris Rock
I think is the main character of that movie, and
they everybody's pulled out their driveway and rush into the
polls to go and vote to make sure the black
man didn't win. But just as they were motivated to
see Donald Trump, when they could have equally been motivated
(21:08):
to prevent a black man from winning the presidency. I mean,
in real time, they could have showed up in unprecedented
numbers to stop that from happening, and couldn't do it
every time, quite frankly up to now and probably beyond
for several election cycles, because that's just where the numbers
are when it comes to electoral performance. That if white
folks wanted to vote and vote the way they vote
(21:32):
right now, which is white men overwhelmingly Republican and white
women consistently over a majority Republican So if they could
have done that, then if this was only going to
be about race, but they didn't. But they didn't do that,
then they did not prevent that from happening. And they
could have, and they could have done it even with
fewer of them showing up than showed up to support Trump,
(21:54):
and in this case, they wanted Trump. And I will
just I'm layering on this that in addition to not
wanting a black woman there, it can also be that
there's some other things that were being communicated in that.
Speaker 1 (22:07):
Missing voted against her or they voted for him either
and both make them racist.
Speaker 2 (22:14):
Series it's a difference without distinction. Completely agree. All I'm
saying is is that if that were the only motivator
by itself, then why didn't that motivator also keep Barack
Obama from office?
Speaker 1 (22:27):
They weren't engaged then, And.
Speaker 4 (22:31):
Since that's not true, some of them, some of them
were voted, were voting to demonstrate they weren't racist. I'm looking,
I'm trying to see where I'm missing this too, but
is then looked up In twenty four ninety million people
didn't vote in twenty eighty million people didn't vote, and
so it was the highest turnout and voter participation since
nineteen o eight, and twenty four was the second highest
(22:51):
since nineteen sixty. In twenty sixteen, one hundred million people
didn't vote, and I'm trying to figure out what the
twenty twelve and two thousand and eight numbers are tour,
which is fine, but I don't remember it and sometimes
might not remember it either.
Speaker 1 (23:07):
I'm not saying that, I'm just saying I don't just
so people know I'm not googling something during the show,
because sometimes numbers are.
Speaker 4 (23:15):
I am googling it during the show because I'm trying
to figure out where the breakdown is. I think what
I was trying to get to is at the end
of the day, what we know is voter participation is
not where it should be in this country, and as
a result, that means that democracy has consistently been failing
people because it doesn't feel like people power. So people
are not going to lean into a system where they
(23:36):
do not feel represented, which brings us full circle to
the point of this show. Because I know we are
supposed to be leaving like really soon and closing out
it really soon.
Speaker 3 (23:46):
What we are struggling with.
Speaker 4 (23:48):
I think all in all is telling people counting down
to the days where their circumstances are going to dramatically change,
counting down to the days where a midterm election means
that all of sudden, now things are going to be
sky as blue, things are great. That is not how
it's feeling, because even while we had a reprieve from
twenty sixteen to twenty twenty, things still haven't drastically changed
(24:11):
for a number of people in our communities. And so
while we count down, let us also be intentional about
the work that needs to shift that is in our
power to do, and be recruiting people that can dramatically
change circumstances because they are showing real courage. Whether it's
one hundred million or eighty million or ninety million, tip,
it is too many people who are sitting out of
(24:32):
participating in this democracy, and that means that the democracy
has to change. I think at the verities we can
all agree on that point.
Speaker 1 (24:41):
I can definitely agree. Yeah, none of us ever disagree.
My only point was to present it like ninety million
people didn't vote this time, as though that was some
sort of anomalycessys crisis that's when I say crisis that
has happened over a lot of election cycles unfortunately in
the country.
Speaker 2 (24:58):
And my question is with you to.
Speaker 4 (25:04):
So, yeah, let's let's get let's fix that.
Speaker 2 (25:11):
Find the idea of the couch one. It's good on
a shirt, but it doesn't have effectual impact in the
sense that when the couch wins, then the couch gets
to decide what happens. And in our democracy, the one
who actually wins gets to decide the policy. And so
when the couch starts laying people off and federal agencies
(25:34):
all throughout the land, then they won. But so long
as they're there. The in the sense that more people
sat the couch than got out and voted for any
one particular candidate, it is. It is a cool observation. However,
the effect of winning to me is you governed. Winning
(25:56):
means you're in charge. Winning means you get to do
the thing that you're inclined to do. And unfortunately the
couch didn't win because I don't think the couch would
have done what Donald Trump has been doing.
Speaker 3 (26:07):
I think.
Speaker 2 (26:10):
I think it should absorb as much time as we've
given the couches one, because it is semantical, and it
has created a debate that I think again ends up
talking about numbers rather than what is I think a greater, bigger, larger,
comprehensive point, and that is around a democracy and a
(26:31):
system of representative democracy that has failed so miserably that
the majority of people are choosing I will stay out
rather than have an impact on which one of these
fools end up serving.
Speaker 1 (26:45):
This is a conversation. No, that's fine. This is a
conversation that I think will be ongoing because I don't
think we've resolved. Do we need to start telling people?
Do we need to continue to tell people how many
days until midterms? So I guess for now we'll keep
doing it. But what I love about this conversation I
have to be honest, all three of us feel very differently,
and I surmised that among our audience that there are
(27:08):
groups of each like. We each have followers who are like, yes,
what Angela is saying, Angela's right? Yes, what Ti He's saying? Yes,
what Andrew was saying?
Speaker 2 (27:15):
Occasionally a good point, yes, even in your whole.
Speaker 1 (27:21):
Like narcissism shade that you threw to me. I actually
take that point and think about it. I think about it.
Speaker 2 (27:28):
I said it's narcissistic. Believe that.
Speaker 1 (27:30):
I think that's agree.
Speaker 2 (27:33):
All the.
Speaker 4 (27:35):
Narcissists was thrown around a lot in the show before
in this show, and I.
Speaker 2 (27:39):
Just want to because you got called it for yourself
asking about tips too.
Speaker 4 (27:44):
I'm just saying, we like that should be the default,
Like y'all need to stop watching the social media videos,
like let me tell you how to find a narcissist,
like everything is it the way.
Speaker 3 (27:54):
You're not actually believe it's actually.
Speaker 1 (27:59):
But let us know it's it's over killed.
Speaker 4 (28:02):
And I do think that we have to do the
hard work of unpacking again. We might have some flat side, Yeah,
trying to We're just trying to solve. Friends, We're just
trying to solve.
Speaker 2 (28:13):
Don't take up space with me either.
Speaker 1 (28:16):
We must hold space.
Speaker 3 (28:19):
Have a boundary. You have a boundary.
Speaker 1 (28:21):
We have the boundaries, all the therapy words. Okay with that,
I'm running. Y'all can keep going, but I'm kind I'm out.
Thank y'all for listening. There are we'll know how many
days the midterm alexis because we don't never don't have
to anyway. We will see y'all next time. Welcome home, y'all.
Speaker 4 (28:54):
Native Lampard is a production of iHeart Radio and partnership
with Reason Choice Media.
Speaker 3 (28:59):
For more podcas we ask for iHeartRadio visits, iHeartRadio app,
Apple Podcasts, or wherever you listen to your favorite shows.
Hosts And Creators
Tiffany Cross
Andrew Gillum
Angela Rye
Popular Podcasts
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
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.