Full Episode - Trump’s Coalition Is Starting To Crack + Why Democrats Struggle…And Can Still Win In Iowa - The Chuck ToddCast

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
Do you hate hangovers, We'll say goodbye to hangovers. Out
of Office gives you the social buzz without the next
day regret. Their best selling out of Office gummies were
designed to provide a mild, relaxing buzz, boost your mood,
and enhance creativity and relaxation. With five different strengths, you
can tailor the dose to fit your vibe, from a
gentle one point five milligram micro dose to their newest

(00:20):
fifteen milligram gummy for a more elevated experience. Their THHC
beverages and gummies are a modern, mindful alternative to a
glass of wine or a cocktail. And I'll tell you this,
I've given up booze. I don't like the hangovers. I
prefer the gummy experience. Soul is a wellness brand that
believes feeling good should be fun and easy. Soul specializes

(00:41):
in delicious HEMP derived THHD and CBD products, all designed
to boost your mood and simply help you unwine so
if you struggle to switch off at night, Soul also
has a variety of products specifically designed to just simply
help you get a better night's sleep, including their top
selling Sleepy gummies. It's a fan favorite for deep restorative sleep.
So bring on the good vibes and treat yourself to

(01:02):
Soul today. Right now, Soul is offering my audience thirty
percent off your entire order. So go to gitsold dot
com use the promo code toodcast. Don't forget that code.
That's getsold dot Com promo code toodcast for thirty percent off. Hello,
They're happy Wednesday, and welcome to another episode of the

(01:24):
Chuck Toodcast.

Speaker 2 (01:25):
So I feel like I.

Speaker 1 (01:26):
Have to do a previously on the Chuck Toodcast. I
literally taped about an hour before Donald Trump did his
own vote counting and realized he was about to see
a mass repudiation of his party going on the record
to release the Epstein Files, And rather than look like

(01:48):
a guy no longer in charge of his party, he
decided to instead get in front of a parade, if
you will, and lo and behold all but one House
Republic and joined what was nearly a unanimous decision by
the House of Representatives to urge the House to release

(02:08):
everything it has in the so called Epstein Files. Now,
of course, we got a long way to go before
there's any anything that gets released. But there's a few
things that I think are worth understanding about Trump's actions,
right number one, And I think first and foremost, and

(02:29):
in fact, I would and I sort of brought this
up before that. Look, he's probably already a lame duck president, right,
but we are. He is certainly not in the acceptance
phase that it's a lame duck president. And I'm myself
want to be careful assuming that we are. I think
as I had compared this, I can't remember previously, but
it's it's sort of like trying to figure out when

(02:50):
when the lame duck period of a presidency begins. Is
like trying to figure out whenever recession begins. You know,
after it started, but you don't quite know when it
started until after the fact. Now do I think eventually
we will go in about three months, we'll say, oh,
this lame duck presidency began, or it may take us
another year or two to determine that the lame duck

(03:11):
presidency began on November, during the November of elections of
twenty twenty five, right, I think that that clearly is
going to be a line of demarcation because but he
is certainly I think desperate to stave off lame ducdom,
if you will. Right, So, what are the evidence that

(03:32):
he's trying to stave it off? Well, something like we're
seeing here, right, I went through a whole series of
things where you're going to start to see a crackup
of the Trump coalition. And frankly, this is a normal
We're actually in a normal time period for a crackup
like this to happen. Trump's essentially been in charge of
America's political weather for about a decade, right, even though

(03:55):
he is he is in the fifth year of the
sixth year of his collective two terms as president, the
four years of Biden. In some way, we're right, it
was Trump making the political whether or not Joe Biden. Right,
Joe Biden may have been president, but we were still
living in the Trump era. And Trump's election into sort

(04:17):
of reelection in twenty twenty four after serving from twenty
seventeen to twenty twenty one, I think reinforces that notion.
But it's important to understand we've been living sort of
ten years this under the cloud of Trump, if you will,
And anytime you go back into sort of periods of

(04:38):
political periods where sort of one person or one entity
sort of controlled the political landscape right FDR from nineteen
thirty two to his death in forty five. But you know,
in some ways his sort of peak of powers was
in this first four to six years, and then even

(04:59):
as he won a third term and a fourth term
each time, he was starting to see his power chip
away on that front. You know, the Republican run of
the Reagan era sort of started to peter out right
around nineteen ninety.

Speaker 2 (05:14):
That was sort of the.

Speaker 1 (05:16):
Tax deal that Bush cut with a Democratic House and
Senate that ended up sort of accelerating a right wing
primary challenge sort of the first shot of the new
Trump era, if you will, with the challenge of Path Buchanan.
But the point is this tenure run that Trump has

(05:38):
sort of dominated the political space we're about at the end,
Like no entity has ever been able to sort of
make this a fifteen year run or a twenty year
run where sort of one person and one entity sort
of dominates an era. Like I said, even FDR couldn't
push it much past twelve years, but it was really,

(05:59):
you know, arguably year ten that he was in some
ways at his peak, and it was certainly before that
that he was at his peak. So I do think
that this is one of those This is almost political
gravity the situation that we're in now, he's going to
do everything he can to stave it off, right, So
he suddenly is lopping off tariffs from all the tariffs

(06:22):
he added to food, he suddenly is getting rid of them.
By the way, if you wonder, if you've ever wondered
about what is the actual definition of gas lighting? While
the Trump White House on food tariffs is exhibit A
of what gaslighting is, which is they put out a
press release claiming they're trying to lower the cost of food.
This is why they're getting rid of these reciprocal tariffs

(06:46):
on food. What they don't tell you is they put
the reciprocal tariffs on food, which is why the cost
of those food items was going up and contributing to
the rising cost of your grocery bilt. But hey, no
one said he didn't listen to the voters when the
voter spoke, and the voter spoke it earlier this month
in November, And that's another way he's trying to get

(07:07):
out of it. So he's trying to stave off lame
ductam with the Epstein files, He gets in front of it,
then endorses it, says he's signed the bill. Nothing to
see here, nothing to hide. He wants to try to
put that chipping away at his power to bet. Then
you've got what he's trying to do with tariffs. Now
we're going to see another round of this when the

(07:28):
courts rule his power is likely unconstitutional. Does it get
used as a moment for other Republicans to come out
against the tariffs and say, hey, we've got to follow
the law and this has got to be a vote
in Congress. And by the way, if Trump has to
go to Congress to get them to agree to his
tariffs in an election year, I don't think he's going

(07:50):
to get the vote that he wants out of that.
So I suspect he'll instead look for other executive authorities
to try to issue these tariffs. But it is going
to set him back, and in the meantime, Republicans who
are looking for an opportunity to have some distance from
an unpopular president, and not just unpopular, but a president

(08:13):
that is just sort of wearing out his welcome right.
This is where Trump fatigue, I think becomes a real thing.
And again, this is not some sort of Trump derangement syndrome,
oh hoopium type of thing that I'm smoking. This is
just what happens when you're in your tenth year of
political domination. That there is just your shtick wears out.

(08:36):
Your Jedi mind tricks don't have the same impact that
they once did. I mean, even look at how you
know his insults right, we're and I hate this, We're
kind of all numb to his insults. I mean, the
guy is a misogynist. Every time a woman dares question
him in the press corps, he lashes out and goes
after looks or goes after the woman and is so sneering.

(09:01):
He cannot handle a woman. Look does he attack male
reporters who do this? Sure, I've been attacked, but he
does not attack with the personal viciousness and the ugliness
and the unseemliness that he does to women reporters. And
it's a shame how many powerful women that work for

(09:23):
the president aren't ashamed of that behavior. It's a bummer.
I wish you know, I'm not going to sit here.
It's like, you know, there's always this like molsm moralizing
that now takes place on social media. Where's everybody standing
up on this issue? And where's you and where's you
and where's you look? We're we're all well past that.
We're kind of numb to. It doesn't make it right.
It just means a reality. But I do think that's

(09:46):
the type of stuff that folks are tiring of. But
it's also to me extraordinarily revealing. Right Trump is feeling
he knows the end is near. He's feeling power slip away.
And when hour starts to slip away, when you're about
to lose your status, you get angry and you lash out,
and so he's angry. He's lashing out. He knows this

(10:09):
situation isn't going well. His vision of what he thought
was going to work is not working. On the domestic economy,
we are not bringing manufacturing back the way he thought
we were bringing manufacturing back. Cutting these deals with these
AI companies is going to end up blowing up in
his face. This is not the populism that he ran on.

(10:30):
And then, of course he's in the midst of legacy building.
He loves, particularly working with the Gulf States because they
always are so transactional, meaning they are willing to pay him,
they are willing to enrich his family businesses. So he
loves doing these deals, but it actually undermines his entire
America First agenda, as Marjorie Taylor Green so uncomfortably likes

(10:54):
to point out. And she's part of that wing of
the party that really did want to say advertise with
the internationalist wing of the GOP, really didn't want to
see American interventions, whether it's in Venezuela, whether it's in Ukraine,
whether it's in the Middle East. So that is a real,

(11:15):
always has been a real movement inside the conservative side
of the aisle. The question is how big or small
it is at any given moment, And right now I
think it is a little bit larger than Donald Trump realizes,
which is why his as he gravitates towards the international
in order to try to build his own legacy, It's

(11:37):
not like the rank and file are following him on that.
So look, like I said, when we previously checked in,
you know we had it was more about, Okay, how
many Republicans are going to be comfortable breaking with Trump?
And then Trump realized, oh my god, over one hundred
we're going to be comfortable doing this. This is going

(11:57):
to get ugly. This is going to have people questioning
my leadership of this party. I want to put that
question off. I don't want that debate to begin. And
so that is why he jumped in front of this
in there.

Speaker 2 (12:10):
Now.

Speaker 1 (12:11):
The reality is are we going to see anything?

Speaker 2 (12:14):
Are we actually going.

Speaker 1 (12:15):
To see these files? Or is the opening of an
investigation that Trump ordered Pambondi to do for quote unquote
Democrats caught up in the Epstein situation going to then
have justice invoking while we're in the middle of an
open investigation, and so we can't we can't make public
any of these records while we're in the middle of

(12:35):
an open investigation, which, by the way, if that is true,
you actually couldn't. You know, it wouldn't be right. But
it does feel as if that Trump is going to
want to find another way to either slow down or
prevent the eventual release of the full amount of of

(12:59):
these documents. A few other a few other notes about
I sort of more have a I'd say the rest
of my introduction here is a little bit more of
a political notebook item Jamal Kus Shogi and MBS. I

(13:21):
know there's a lot of people moralizing over and look
what Trump. Our relationship with Saudi Arabia is what it is,
and I don't like it. I don't like that we
don't prioritize human rights here. I don't like that we
didn't lean on the Saudi's when we could have at

(13:43):
a certain moment when they when when it was clear
that he had ordered the assassination and the dismemberment of
a journalist. But we didn't do it. And you know
what else, it didn't do it. Joe Biden didn't do it.
There is a lot of foreign policy experts that are
whispering in the ears of both Donald Trump and Joe
Biden and whispered in the air. And look at Jake

(14:08):
Sullivan would say it publicly that Saudi Arabia is a
swing country and that we had to accept them warts
and all, peeing coming in our tent and peeing on
the outside, rather than moving over to China's tent and
peeing and peeing on our tent, if you will. And
so I know there's a lot of I think the

(14:34):
criticism that Trump is so dismissive of the finding that
NBS had something to do with Kushogi's death, that NBS
didn't that we didn't sort of. But look, that's not
a democracy. That Saderreba is not a democracy. It is
a it's a dictatorship. I mean it's called a monarchy.

(14:55):
But let's you know, I think I've said this before.
All monarchies are dictator Are they benevolent dictatorships or malevolent dictatorships?

Speaker 2 (15:05):
Right? Are they? Are they?

Speaker 1 (15:06):
You know, there's a handful of monarchies that believe in
them that have allowed democracy to happen. But a lot
of these monarchies in the Middle East, they're just glorified.
They're just dictatorships with just titles that aren't general or president.
Instead they are titles that are king or prince. But

(15:27):
there there's a form of a dictatorship. And obviously we
are in there are so many ties with the Saudis,
and there's been so many presidents that the Saudis have
been sidling up to and you know, with various actors.
This is this is real politique, right, This is sometimes
you you you know, you don't have the allies that

(15:52):
you want, you have the allies that you need. And
at the end of the day, if Saudi Arabi and
Israel have official relations, that's a big deal in the
Middle East, and that only increases the chances of stability
in the Middle East. Stability in the Middle East is
good for the United States and good for our national security.
It doesn't excuse what NBS did. It is a shame

(16:17):
that we have not come up with a better way
to hold Saudi Arabia accountable, but it's well passed holding
them accountable. And you can be as angry about Donald
Trump's dismissive of this yesterday as you can, but realize
Joe Biden and he may have been dragged to Saudi

(16:39):
Arabia kicking and screaming, but he made nice with Saudi
Arabia because there has been a decision made that for
the greater good of America's national security interests, Saudi Arabia
has to be an ally and we can't alienate them.
And apparently, the more you go after MBS over Jamal
shuk Kushoki, the more it gets alien the more they

(17:01):
may get alienated, and we can't afford to drive them
in the arms of Russia and China. It's an uncomfortable fact.
But this is why the job of being president and
leader of the so called free world is quite difficult
and why you want as moral and ethical of people
as you could possibly find to sit in that chair,

(17:23):
because when you have amoral people, they will just shrug
their shoulders when people commit amorl and immoral acts, which
is exactly what Donald Trump has done with the Saudis.
I suppose we should be happier that Joe Biden condemned
what Thesadis did, but it did not change our behavior
towards Thesati's, nor did it change the Saudi behavior. So

(17:44):
that is what it is. Sometimes I think we have
to understand the uncomfortable reality of the situation, and this
is who the King of Saudi Arabia has chosen to
run his government and run a very powerful regional power

(18:05):
in the Middle East. And sometimes you have to deal
with leaders. You know, is Air Towan the best leader
of Turkey we could have? The answer is no, but
we have no choice but to deal with them as
a ally. Is bb net and Yahoo an ideal ally
as head of government Israel Harden of course hardon now,

(18:27):
but this is the situation we live in. So anyway,
I just wanted to it is because it really I
personally really struggle with it. I am so outraged right
by the dismissiveness of the just killing of journalists, the

(18:48):
disregard that Donald Trump has for journalists, the threats that
he makes, the fact that his behavior echoes what an
authoritarian leader NBS behaved, and that he somehow is condoning
that behavior. It would be nice if we at least
paid lip service to the First Amendment, and if we

(19:11):
had a sitting president of the United States that gave
two shits about the Constitution. But unfortunately that is not
the situation we live in in the moment. But we
can I think, you know, I try to sort of
be I can tell you how I personally feel and
at the same time trying to explain the political reality

(19:34):
of the situation that we are in. And when it
comes to relationships with Saudi Arabia, this country has come
to the bipartisan conclusion that we have to work with
this dictatorship, not necessarily work to change the regime or
undermine it or to ostracize it, given that everything is

(20:00):
always seen through the prism of we've got to have
it more checks on China and Russia. That's how you
find yourself in bed with people that you wouldn't necessarily
want to be morally or ethically connected to.

Speaker 2 (20:14):
But hence this is where we are.

Speaker 1 (20:19):
This episode of the Chuck Podcast is brought to you
by Wildgrain. Wild Grain is the first Bake from Frozen
subscription box for our teasonal breads, seasonal pastries, and fresh pastas,
plus all items conveniently bake in twenty five minutes or less.
Unlike many store bought options, Wild Grain uses simple ingredients
you can pronounce and a slow fermentation process that can

(20:42):
be easier on your belly and richer in nutrients and antioxidants.
Wildgrain's boxes are fully customizable. They're constantly adding seasonal and
limited time products for you to enjoy. In addition to
their classic box, they now feature a gluten free box
and a plant based box. I checked out the gluten
free box, and let me tell you they have a
gluten free sourdough bread.

Speaker 2 (21:04):
It is.

Speaker 1 (21:04):
We got two loads of it and we've done one
loaf already. It's a cranberry and almond sourdough bread. It's
like the best raisin bread you've ever had, except it's
not raisin. It's great. You're gonna love this, you know.
It's hit or miss if you mess around in the
gluten free bread world.

Speaker 2 (21:20):
This is a hit.

Speaker 1 (21:21):
Seriously, I was impressed, so look for a limited time,
wild Grain is offering our listeners thirty dollars off your
first box, plus free croissants in every box when you
go to wildgrain dot com slash podcast to start your subscription,
follow these instructions. Free croissants in every box, thirty dollars
off your first box when you go to wildgrain dot
com slash podcast. That's wildgrain dot com slash toodcast, or

(21:45):
simply use the promo code toodcast at check out. Always
use the code, get the discount. I'm telling you it's excellent,
excellent bread.

Speaker 2 (21:57):
A few other notes.

Speaker 1 (22:01):
I will confess to reading a lot about the Olivia
Newsy stuff. I am there are so many things I'd
like to say about it. I am disgusted that any
news organization has hired her as a quote unquote journalist.
The minute you sleep with your sources, you have compromised
your journalism. I you know, her personal decisions are her

(22:24):
personal decisions. I'm not going to judge her. I'd certainly
not date her, and I'd certainly not want to be
in relationship with her, and I'd certainly be recommending that
perhaps she ought a look at the pattern of creepy
old men she finds herself attracted to and would wonder,
what is there a pattern here?

Speaker 2 (22:44):
But you know, I.

Speaker 1 (22:46):
Hope she goes and talks with somebody. I hope she
can find some peace and find some therapy on that.
You know, the creepy old men that she has associated
herself with, none of them are people I would want
my son to emulate. They are not role models for anybody,

(23:06):
and they maybe one of them may have been a
talented broadcaster, but it doesn't mean he is not a
despicable human being. One of them may have a famous name,
but it doesn't mean he's not a despicable human being.
And one of them may have been a former public
servant and he seems to be shall we say, morally challenged.

(23:31):
But I think one of the three people she's been
connected with is not a total scumback two of them
that actually might be a debate about whether that description
describes them, But I'm gonna leave them nameless because one
of them just cares about hearing their name said and

(23:53):
is so desperate for relevancy and to profess grievance that
that he doesn't know just when to go away, and
he certainly has treated anybody that has tried to give
him grace. He is treated like crap. And here we
have another example of this person treating another human being

(24:17):
just horrifically and despicably. But the whole thing, I feel
like I'm watching a car wreck that I shouldn't be watching.
And yet I will accept the premise that I've been
following it like one might follow all my children or
days of our lives. But I will say this, it's

(24:39):
really a shame that the institution of sort of the
media and political media and journalism that people that sort
of abuse their privilege of being political journalists like Olivia
Newsy has done, has then, you know, sort of disgraces

(25:00):
the institution for those of us that have worked really
hard to try to build credibility, you know. And this
is why it's you know, I can't even I mean,
you know, she's not alone. It's sort of bringing shame
upon the industry that is quote media these days. I mean,
what Megan Kelly's bizarre defense that somehow desiring a fifteen

(25:22):
year old is different than desiring an eight year old
is sort of like that is the weirdest hair to
choose to split. It is an obvious play simply for
algorithm or to just play Kate. By the way, how
embarrassed is she now that even the President wants to
release the Epstein files. So, but when you are so

(25:42):
concerned about not alienating your audience, if you've wondered here,
as you could tell, I am not interested in playkating
one side or the other just to build a cheap.

Speaker 2 (25:54):
Audience.

Speaker 1 (25:55):
I respect the folks that choose to come here too
much not to tell them the actual reality of the
situation as best as I can present it and as
best as I see it. I'm not guaranteeing you that
I am all knowing or all anything. I am simply
telling you I'm giving you the honest assessment based on

(26:17):
my experience, based on what I think I'm looking at,
and I'm not playing to an algorithm or playing to
an audience just to make the audience feel better. And
it is shameful that someone like Megan Kelly, who has
legacy media credentials and has used them to claim credibility
as a media reporter, to then go out there and

(26:40):
use whatever remaining credibility she may have with some people
to defend pedophilia, to say, well, you know, hey, creepy
old men that desire fifteen year olds, they shouldn't be
treated as harshly as creepy old men who may desire
eight year olds. I mean, come on, you know, stop digging,

(27:04):
and you know, you know stop you know I will
tell you this. I hate nothing more than her being
classified as part of the larger media ecosystem because it
brings disrepute on all of us. But hey, I think
this is why so many of you have chosen to
trust individuals and not institutions, because the institutions themselves, I

(27:28):
have been corrupted in many ways, are corroded by some
of these people, and the best you can do is
to is to focus on individuals. All right, Sorry, my
crankiness is over. But I mean, I can't believe Vanity Fair,
which which I think feels like it used to be
this sort of prideful news magazine that would would do

(27:55):
aggressive reporting but always grounded in real journalism. I'm sure
they've had reporters who've slept sources in the past, but
not like this into knowingly hire a reporter who has
done this serially. I think shows you that something has
gone totally off the rails right now at Conde Nast, and.

Speaker 2 (28:18):
That's a bummer.

Speaker 1 (28:20):
That's too bad. I hope somebody sobers up given what
we're all seeing and witnessing on that. All right, very quickly,
a few political items. I hope you're paying attention. There's
a special before the year goes out, there's a special
election in Tennessee seven. We have seen that Donald Trumps
superpack has dropped a whole bunch of money into that

(28:42):
special election. They're trying to help the Republican candidate, Mark
Van Epps in that one. I will say this the
Democratic candidate. One could argue that the Democrats didn't get
the candidate that they would have won, that actually could
have pulled this upset right in bain Ben. I hope
I'm pronouncing her name correctly. It's b e h n

(29:08):
Is was the more progressive candidate. It is not. This
is not a Connor Lamb situation or a John Ossoff situation.
Someone that's a little bit closer to the center. That
quote unquote fits the district. I think Republicans think they
will be able to paint her as just a bit
too progressive for Tennessee, a bit too progressive for the

(29:30):
national suburbs. But we're looking at single digits in this,
you know, I think that I think the fair over
underline on this, if you were going to set a spread,
is somewhere in the five to seven point range, and
I would say over seven you have to feel pretty
good as a Republican that maybe you know, you can

(29:52):
stave off a massive way. But if this is under
five with a candidate this progressive on the Democratic side,
that means that is all environment, that is all sort
of that lopsided turnout. So you know, I keep an
eye on it. It's you know, it's obviously it's a
big twenty plus point Trump district. If a Democrat wins Trump,

(30:15):
a Republican would likely win it in a regular general election.
But the fact that Republicans are spending money there is
just yet another sign that they do have a massive
turnout issue.

Speaker 2 (30:28):
Right.

Speaker 1 (30:28):
Their voters don't come out for these non presidential elections
as it is, and now you have sort of an enthusiastic,
sort of anti Trump base that is surging to the polls,
as we've now seen in these.

Speaker 2 (30:40):
Off off your elections.

Speaker 1 (30:41):
So not surprising that they're dropping money there. Frankly, it's
probably a smart investment and it should it should keep things.
It probably will keep that, keep that district Republican. The
other thing that happened just before I went to.

Speaker 2 (31:01):
I went to air.

Speaker 1 (31:02):
Here is the court ruling in Texas. Now I'm still
looking for some clarification, but it looks like California.

Speaker 2 (31:09):
You know, So if.

Speaker 1 (31:09):
Texas is maps the re redisterting, if the new maps
right now have been thrown out, the decision will get appealed.
Then we shall see what happens. But if they stay
thrown out, the California map doesn't revert, even though originally
the original legislation and the proposition was that the map,
you know that they wouldn't do this if Texas stood down.

(31:32):
Once Texas went through it, they got rid of that language.
So if the Texas maps get thrown out but California's
maps stay, you want to talk about a karma moment
for Donald Trump, you know he instigated this. We could
be in a situation where Democrats actually net more seats

(31:53):
out of re redistricting because of the Texas map getting
thrown out throughout right, We've already seen what happened in Utah.
We saw the compromise that Republicans made with Democrats.

Speaker 2 (32:03):
In Ohio.

Speaker 1 (32:05):
We have an Indiana state Senator that continues to stand
up and say no to redistricting, and it looks like
that that's at least going to prevent a special session.
So I don't know how they're going to get I
don't think they can will it to happen because the
clock is going to run out. But if they if
Republicans can't get a court to bless this map in Texas,

(32:25):
this entire exercise will have cost them seats, not gain
them seats. As with the Texas map, it would now
tay an open question. Does Virginia stand down if the
Texas because Virginia is looking to add yet three or
four more to the Democratic column, or do Republicans start

(32:46):
to put pressure in some of these others. Does Florida
get aggressive and trying to change its map and then
therefore Virginia stays this. So look, we've got a bit
of a shake up here. As I've told you, I
still think the re redistricting wars they're either it's most
likely going to be a net change of no more
than two or three to benefit the Republicans, but if
the Texas mech gets thrown out, it could end up

(33:08):
being two or three, then ends up benefiting the Democrats.
And again, those of you that believe in karma would say, hey,
karma is a bitch, right, Welcome to that world, mister President.
But there's an appeals process. We'll see what happens here.
But you know it, one would hope the courts would

(33:31):
be uncomfortable with the willy nilly nature that all of
these states and all of these legislatures are going about
the attempt at redistricting every two years. I was recently
doing a I was on a panel with my friend
Brad Todd, a longtime Republican consultant.

Speaker 2 (33:48):
He says, you know, he says.

Speaker 1 (33:50):
The last time that this country regularly had states redistricting
every two years was the eighteen forties. He goes, I
don't want to have to tell you where what would happen,
what happened from the eighteen forties to the eighteen fifties,
and what that eventually led to. But the point is
this re redistricting is unhealthy for our politics. It's unhealthy

(34:10):
for the system it was such a it is such
a corrosive thing that Donald Trump, a war that Donald
Trump started, But now that you have the Democrats willing
to engage in it, it certainly is creating a landscape

(34:30):
for twenty twenty six that is suddenly looking a lot
more bullish for the Democrats and a lot more bearish
for the Republicans. And throwing out this Texas map would
only make a mediocre environment suddenly look a whole lot worse.
All right with that, we're actually going to focus a

(34:51):
little bit on twenty twenty six. My interview today is
with a new candidate, if you will. It's one of
these moderate, outsider Demokocrats that the party is hoping can
flip some red state Senate seats. Josh Turret is one
of a couple of candidates that's running in the open
seat in Iowa. Turrek's story is a fascinating one. He's

(35:14):
from Council Bluffs. He represents a fairly a district that
in the state legislature that is Republican, that is a
Trump voting district. He is somebody that that Democrats think
might be able to talk to Republicans. And if you know,
the only way to win an Iowa Senate seat is

(35:35):
to do that. He calls himself a Prairie populist, but
he is somewhat new to politics. He's spent the last
twenty years as a professional wheelchair basketball player. He's also
a two time gold medalist in the Paralympics, leading the
US men's wheelchair basketball team. So it's an interesting story.

(36:00):
We talk a little bit of hoops at the end,
but for the most part, it is a who are you,
why are you running? And what do you stand for?
And where do you come down on a few of
the issues that do divide democrats these days. So, as
you know, Iowa is one of is one of.

Speaker 2 (36:16):
My adopted home states.

Speaker 1 (36:18):
It's where my dad grew up, and so I've always
considered Iowa as part of my roots, even though I
never grew up there. Those of you have heard me
tell this story though my savings account was at the
Waterloo Savings Alone when I was a kid for a time.
That's how important it was for my father to my
father to connect me in some form or another with

(36:40):
a route in Iowa. So I always pay a little
bit more attention to what's happening in Iowa, just like
I do with what's happening in my actual home state
of Florida as well as my other home state, which
of course is Virginia. So with that, we'll sneak at
a break and when we come back my conversation with
Iowa Senate Hopeful Josh Turam, there's a reason results matter

(37:04):
more than promises, just like there's a reason Morgan and
Morgan is America's largest injury law firm. For the last
thirty five years, they've recovered twenty five billion dollars for
more than half a million clients. It includes cases where
insurance companies offered next to nothing, just hoping to get
away with paying as little as possible. Morgan and Morgan
fought back ended up winning millions. In fact, in Pennsylvania,

(37:26):
one client was awarded twenty six million dollars, which was
a staggering forty times the amount that the insurance company
originally offered. That original offer six hundred and fifty thousand
dollars twenty six million, six hundred fifty thousand dollars. So
with more than one thousand lawyers across the country, they
know how to deliver for everyday people. If you're injured,
you need a lawyer, You need somebody to get your back.

(37:47):
Check out for Thepeople dot Com, Slash podcast, or dial
Pound Law Pound five to two nine law on your
cell phone. And remember all law firms are not the same,
So check out Morgan and Morgan. Their fee is free
unless they win.

Speaker 2 (38:05):
So joining me now.

Speaker 1 (38:06):
Is one of the most decorated Olympians in Iowa history.
Josh Turik is candidate for the US Senate, but born
with spina bifida. He ended up making a name for
himself in playing professionally wheelchair basketball, earning a gold medal
as the leader of the US Olympic team at the Paralympics.

(38:30):
And he's now a politician, not the blazing a trail
that frankly is actually not a first time trail when
it comes to that people. Certainly we've had our share
of athletes go into politics. Josh is from the western
part of the state. It's the state I'm the least
familiar with council bluffs. He will correct me if I'm wrong,

(38:52):
which also means he's sort of in that weird no
man's land. How much Iowan, how much Nebraskan, which I'm
going to give my hard time about with that, let's
talk a little bit about your campaign and who you are.
Josh Turk, It's nice to meet you.

Speaker 2 (39:07):
Yeah, Chuck, thanks for having me. First. I'm gonna have
to correct you on I'm not an Olympian. I'm a Paralympian.
I'm a four time Paralympian, time gold medalist, the Summer.

Speaker 1 (39:19):
Olympian, I mean, it's part of the Olympics, isn't it
all the you know?

Speaker 2 (39:23):
I mean, well, the Summer Olympics is the largest sporting
event on Earth in terms of total athletes and total countries,
and the Summer Paralympics, which immediately follows the Olympics, is
the second largest sporting event on Earth. And I'm a
very proud Paralympian and two time gold medalist. And then
the other correction is, you're right I am. I am

(39:44):
a politician, but I really would define myself as a
as a representative. A politician can be a bit of
a pejorative, no, and I get that.

Speaker 1 (39:51):
I mean just like journalists can be a bit of
a pejorative these days, right, you know, or a member
of the media, Uh, if you will, But let me
start with Eric, you know, if let's let's start with
your life as a professional athlete. You know, you're born
with spina bifida. You didn't probably think as a kid
you were going to be a professional athlete. Walk me
through that.

Speaker 2 (40:12):
Yeah. Sure. I was born and raised in Council BLUs, Iowa.
Council Bluss is a very working class community. Sixty five
percent of my community lives at or below the poverty line.
I grew up to a large family, three sisters, one brother,
and we grew up with a lot of economic struggle.
We went to the Goodwill for our clothes, We shared clothes,

(40:32):
went to the free summer lunch programs. There were times
where my mom put our grocery bill on the credit card.
So certainly somebody is familiar with a lot of economic
struggle of what a lot of people are going through
right now, both in Iowa and around the country. And
then I was was born with my condition. I was
born with a condition called spina bifida. This was due
to my father's exposure to agent orange and Vietnam. I

(40:56):
had my first see do you.

Speaker 1 (40:57):
Directly is that's a direct fact that this is been
directly Yeah.

Speaker 2 (41:02):
Actually, responsible, it's one of it's one of the few
times where the government has had to admit culpability when
when I was younger, we were part of the lawsuit
and did the DNA testing. And yet because of that,
actually receive my health care that is related to my
spina bifida.

Speaker 1 (41:19):
Through the VA and so yes, and that's for lively, right,
that's for life. You're on Tricare for life because of that.

Speaker 2 (41:27):
That is correct anything that is directly related to my
to my spina bifida. So in my spina bifida, I
had my first surgery at one day old. I had
twenty one surgeries before I was twelve, almost all of
which took place at Shriner's Hospital because it was the
only way that my family could afford to do it.
So I'm certainly somebody in a deeply personal way, I
understand the importance of affordable and accessible health care for individuals.

(41:51):
Thankfully for me, I found wheelchair basketball at a young age.
I went to an adapted sports program in Omaha, Nebraska,
and it exposed me to all kinds of adapt to sports.
And I come from a big sports family. Actually, both
my mother and sister were basketball players and went on
to play professional basketball. And really that was what I
was struggling. Legitimately, I was somebody that was bullied so bad.

(42:12):
It's hard enough to go through life well as a
kid with economic struggle, but then you had a healthcare
struggle and it was difficult for me and was bullied
so bad. I actually I left public school for a bit,
but it provided me. It provided me really social setting
and everything that I needed to be able to be successful.
Because of wheelchair basketball, I was ultimately able to get

(42:34):
a college scholarship along with the help of vocational rehabilitation.
Had it not been for wheelchair basketball, I don't think
I would have even gone on to college. And I
had a very successful collegiate career in wheelchair basketball. Scored
over four thousand career points and sixty three points in
a game, which are still records at my school. And
then I had the opportunity to do something that I
didn't even know existed, which was professional wheel basketball, which

(42:56):
doesn't exist in America, only exist over in Europe. Spent
some time over there. Where did you live in Europe?

Speaker 1 (43:02):
Coort where the various Where was your franchise?

Speaker 2 (43:04):
Where was I was able to play in Outside of Milan, Italy?
I played in the South of France, which was an
amazing opportunity, and then played in Madrid, Spain, and in Bilbaospang.
Those were the places let me played.

Speaker 1 (43:17):
Let me ask you, and maybe you've I don't know
if you've thought about this, but why has Europe been
on the forefront of why why don't we have this
in America? And if you think about it, the first
women's professional basketball leagues were all in Europe. Weren't here?

Speaker 2 (43:37):
Have you?

Speaker 1 (43:38):
I'm just curious why it's to me too bad that
you had to leave America to go pursue this stream.
Why do you think we don't value it here?

Speaker 2 (43:49):
I think that our sports can be very masculinely driven,
and I think the European ideal for sports is more
open to the idea of female sports and to to
adapt to sports in a way that that for whatever reason,
you know, the American paradigm on sports is just dramatically different.

(44:10):
It is it's it's it's much more inclusive in that sense.
In America, it was a struggle for us just to
be able to get a handful of individuals just to
come in and watch us, if you're like family and friends.
And yet when we're over and we're able to get
in front of thousands and thousands of folks.

Speaker 1 (44:26):
So it's a it's just a different culture.

Speaker 2 (44:28):
Yeah, I mean, it's a totally totally different sports culture.
And it was an amazing opportunity to be able to
to live in experience, especially as a poor kid from
from Iowa that had gotten his bachelor's degree in history.
It was an amazing opportunity to be able to see
these places I had only been able to read about
in history books. And to be able to you learn
so much about yourself and about others and societies and

(44:50):
social safety, and that's when you're when you're living overseas,
and yeah, it was it was an amazing opportunity for me.

Speaker 1 (44:55):
How's your talient a death SA, Probably it's better than mine,
So don't worry whatever you say.

Speaker 2 (45:03):
My Spanish, My Spanish is good. My wife is Dominican
by birth and Spanish by passport and met her when
I was playing out in Madrid, and so certainly that
one is pretty.

Speaker 1 (45:15):
Much a little bit better than Italian. Right now, what
you learned one more man's language, though you should be
able to understand all the other thing. So to turn
to politics, if you weren't a politic just before.

Speaker 2 (45:27):
The one thing I want to I want to cover
on this is we didn't get to it. I did
end up the highlight of my basketball career was being
a four time Paralympian and two times yeah goal something
gold medals, yeah correct, and especially we're a basketball nation,
but we had gone twenty eight years without winning gold
and so we went from nineteen eighty eight all the
way until twenty sixteen without winning a gold medal. So

(45:48):
some I'm really really proud of. That was the way
I ended my career was with winning back to back
gold medals.

Speaker 1 (45:55):
So that was the end of my basketball career before
we jumped to you, actually your next it is you
had such success in that phase of your life, how
hard was it to walk away?

Speaker 2 (46:08):
Not hard at all. Actually, for me, from the very beginning,
the goal was just to be able to represent my
country in one Paralympics and to maybe have the opportunity
to win one gold medal was always the goal for me.
So the fact that I was able to represent in
four Paralympic Games and win two gold medals, ultimately Father

(46:28):
Time is undefeated too. By the time I got to
my last Paralympics. I mean right that the athlete is Unfortunately,
we have to die to death and we spend tens
of thousands of hours at trying to become great and
become an expert in a field and then it gets
taken away from you. But by the time that I
got to that last Paralympics, which was in Tokyo twenty twenty,

(46:49):
which ended up being twenty twenty one because of COVID,
I knew that that was going to be the last
basketball game that I ever was going to play. And
I was really really clear too that I wanted to
have as successful of a part B of my life
as my part A was, and my part A was
pretty successful. So it was beautiful actually because in Tokyo,
I knew that was going to be the last games
I ever was going to play, so I was able

(47:09):
to smell the roses a little bit and appreciate it
being the.

Speaker 1 (47:12):
How did what was it like to watch to be
a spectator in twenty twenty four?

Speaker 2 (47:18):
It's one of the only times actually that I missed it, truthfully,
But you know, and because because there's so many of
those guys that are still on that team that I'm
very very close with you develop a genuine brotherhood with
these guys that you go through so much struggle with.
But it was beautiful to be able to see them
they actually won. It was the we became the first
team to ever win three gold medals in a row.

(47:39):
So I was it was amazing to be able to
watch them and support them as I was going through
it was it was nice. Actually it was kind of
cathartic for me and watch a little bit of their
games as I after I was going out knocking doors
and crawling stairs trying to win my reelection.

Speaker 1 (47:54):
Right, So tell me about the decision to go into politics.
Was there other fields that you were contemplating and you
know why what drew you to the political space?

Speaker 2 (48:08):
Yeah? Well, two things. One is I've been a director
of a nonprofit organization for ten years and what we
do is we provide free summer camps to disabled kids
and adapted sports opportunity. Just to be a role model
to that community and to be able to give back.
When I finished with my basketball career as well, I
got certified and what's called an assistive Technology professional, So

(48:28):
I was federally certified to be able to assist to
assess and provide mobility devices manual wheelchairs and power wheelchairs
for individuals with disabilities. And I was working with children,
I was working with newly injured individuals. But where I
was really spending the vast majority of my time where
with individuals with progressive conditions, conditions like muscular dystrophe and

(48:49):
lou Garry's disease. And what we were showing was every
single day we were dealing with unnecessary denials and delays.
And what we were showing internally is since Iowa in
the Nebraska had privatized their Medicaid system, a one thousand
percent increase in denial rate. I thought that this was
fundamentally wrong and immoral and that somebody should do something.

(49:09):
I mean, it's literally maximizing profits off the backs of
the most vulnerable. I mean, in the case of als,
oftentimes it's eighteen months or even shorter from assessment. All
the way, these people don't have time for denials and delays.
And then I had found out that Iowa had never
had a permanently disabled member of the legislature, even though
we're a state of one hundred and fifty years in

(49:30):
a governing body of one hundred and fifty members. We've
got one in five islands to either blind, death, intellectually disabled,
or physically disabled. And I thought to myself, this is
probably why we're seeing these barriers to healthcare and to
employment is because of the complete and total lack of representation.
And although I was out in very red western Iowa
and they said, Josh, you can't win as a Democrat

(49:52):
out here, I said, I'm going to do this the
same way that I've done with my basketball career, try
to win gold medals. I'm going to go out and
I'm going to outwork my opponent every single day. And
that's what I did. For me. That meant going out
every day Raynor shine hot or cold, and dragging my
wheelchair upstairs to have conversations with Republicans and independence because
it didn't work any other way.

Speaker 1 (50:13):
You know, it's interesting for you to say that about
Iowa because given that Tom Harkin, the former Senator, and
Bob Dole were basically the godfathers of the eighty A Act.
And in fact, I mean, look, when I was growing
up there, it weren't very many ramps. You know. I
had an elderly grandmother who we were constantly lifting a

(50:33):
chair and all this stuff. I mean, I don't think
people realize as and we are a long way away
from everything being accessible for somebody who needs to use
a wheelchair these days. But to think where we were
in the seventies and eighties compared to where we are today,
it's because of an Iowa senator and a Kansas Senator

(50:54):
from each side of the aisle. And there was a
lot of momentum for that. And it does feel as
if even the eighties that the ADYA feels like something
that hasn't that sort of hit a wall a little bit.
I imagine you have a lot of opinions about the ADA Act.

Speaker 2 (51:09):
Yeah, you're certainly correct. I mean a handful of things there.
One is you know, he's a good friend of mine now,
but he really is my political hero is Senator Tom Harkin.
And this, in truth is one of the reasons why
I'm doing this, is this is his seat that is
up now after twelve years, you know, thirty years he
was our Iowa senator and now it's been held by

(51:30):
a Republican for the last twelve years. And myself, in
so many disabled iolands, so many disabled Americans, I'm only
here all the opportunities that I've been given for occupationally
or educationally is only because of the work that Senator
Harken and you know, Congressman Tony Coeo and as you said,

(51:50):
Bob Dole ended up doing on the American with Disabilities Act.
They literally provided me, in so many disabled Americans in
on ramp onto society to be able to be successful.
One of the reasons why I'm doing this is because
here in Iowa, we deserve to once again have a
senator that is going to fight for the people and
fight for the middle class, and fight for social and

(52:11):
economic justice, and fight for these social safety nets that
have allowed me to be successful in my life Medicare, Medicaid,
social Security, and not just look out for billionaires in
large corporations. It really is, I'm only here because of
Senator Harkin, and I want to be able to continue
his legacy and champion and carrying that flag and fighting
for the people and fighting for healthcare.

Speaker 1 (52:31):
It's possible that our friend Tony Koelo might even be
listening right now. He's somebody that I've known a long
time in politics and very I mean, look, this is
the passion was ultimately one of the most passionate things
he worked on. I know that, and he's very sensitive.
I mean, I would get grief from him if he
ever thought I wasn't giving somebody, you know, if I

(52:53):
wasn't giving a benefit of doubt due to some sort
of physical issue, you know, whether was somebody with a
with a verbal issue or something with their physical traits.

Speaker 2 (53:05):
And uh, he's.

Speaker 1 (53:07):
A I consider him a longtime friend, and I imagine you.

Speaker 2 (53:11):
He's he's filled with advice.

Speaker 1 (53:13):
I bet in your campaign.

Speaker 2 (53:15):
He absolutely is. And I've been I've been grateful to
to be able to have now a friendship with with
both Congressmen Coeo and and and Senator Harkin. And this
is this is this is certainly one of the reasons
why I'm doing this is to continue on that legacy.
One of the things that Senator Harkin talks about is
one of the beauties of the American with Disabilities Act
is that not one Nickel actually went to an individual

(53:38):
with a disability. Is all it was doing was just
evening the playing field. It was just providing an equality
of opportunity, uh to individuals. And and that's what certainly,
that's what what we're fighting for.

Speaker 1 (53:50):
It was equal access not equal outcomes, equal access. That's right,
that's correct, you know, which seems to be. I mean,
this is you know, it's it's one thing you know
in those that physically have things that they have to overcome,
but then there are you know, this is the same
conversation we're trying to have about immigration, you know, the

(54:11):
same conversation we're trying to have about any body that's
trying to live a free life, right and wants to
have equal opportunity, equal access, not necessarily equal outcome. Can
you what do you think is the hardest part of convincing,
because I do think when you explain to anybody left

(54:31):
or right that it's about equal access, not equal outcome.
Nobody's against equal access, you know, it's the equal outcome
conversation that becomes the debate about all these Yeah.

Speaker 2 (54:43):
Absolutely. The way that I would say that is when
I'm out there. I represent the redditest district that is
represented by a Democrat that was won on election day,
so Trump won my county by twenty points. I represent
two communities in the Iowa legislature, Carter Lake, which Trump
won by eighteen points, and my hometown of Council Blufs,

(55:05):
which he won by ten points, and I was able
to win by nearly six points, you know, about fifty
percent better than any other Democratic Do you think it's
the Trump voter, The Turrek Trump voter is someone that
Here's what I would say is that the one thing
I'll give credit to Trump for is that he accurately
addressed that the status quo was not working for the

(55:27):
average American and is seeing a hollowing out of the
middle class. And the Turrek Trump voter is maybe what
they would be a common sense voter to some degree
that felt like the Democratic Party had shifted away too
much focusing on culture war issues, or didn't feel like
it was looking out enough for the middle class or

(55:49):
the average American. And whereas for me, I'm a common
sense prairie populace, much like Senator Harkin. And when I'm
out there, what I'm talking about are the kitchen table issues.
It's the way that and I was very disciplined about that,
both not only in my legislative races, but in the
Senate race of talking about that. This what matters the
most is the kitchen table issues. It's about affordability, it's

(56:11):
about driving down cost a livable wage, it's about affordable housing,
it's about affordable healthcare, pharmaceuticals. We have some very specific
issues to Iowa too that I would talk about. We
were number one in public education and now we've precipitously
dropped to the middle of the pack. So I would
talk about public dollars belonging to public schools, talk about

(56:31):
doing something about our cancer rates. In Iowa were the
only state with the growing cancer rate, second highest rates
to only Kentucky. And I would talk about the need
for clean air and clean water because that's something certainly
something that touches everyone, regardless of where you sit on
the political spectrum, doesn't matter Democrat or Republican. And those
are the things that I talked about. And I think
that there were some voters in there, certainly because a

(56:54):
fourteen percent performance that that resonated with. But I think
that the way that we can want once again when
elections in state like Iowa is through genuine economic populism,
what I call prairie populism.

Speaker 1 (57:14):
So I've had some interesting conversations with a couple of
with the South Dakota former South Dakota Democrat is running
for the US Senate now is an independent. I had
Rob sand on this podcast a few months ago and
he said something, I said, why are you running? You know,
he talked about the problems of the Democratic brand, and
I'd say, so, why are you running as a Democrat?

(57:36):
And he said, well, if there was another way, maybe
I would run as an independent, but this is the
most viable way to get on the ballot. The South
Dakota Independent made the case. He said, the reason he's
running as an independent teat of a Democrat is that
there are some people that won't listen to his pitch
if they find out he is a D next to
his name. And the minute he doesn't have a D
next to his name, he's suddenly having these conversations with

(57:57):
a whole bunch of voters going yeah, I agree with you, Yes,
I agree with you.

Speaker 2 (58:00):
I agree with you.

Speaker 1 (58:01):
Does the D next to your name? What happens when
somebody says, hey, I like what you're saying, but why
do you have a D next to your name? What's
your answer to that?

Speaker 2 (58:10):
Yeah, I mean, I'm really really clear of why I
have a D next to my name. I'm always reminded
of the quote from John F. Kennedy when he said
you know, why are you a liberal? Why are you
a Democrat? And it's because I believe in looking forward,
not backwards. That I believe in and I care about
people's jobs, about people's healthcare, about people's schools. This is why,

(58:33):
ultimately I'm a Intagrammer. I say that I have two
north stars politically. The first is a quote from Franklin
delan and Roosevelt, which I think is the greatest president
of the twentieth century and also the only disabled president
that we've ever had, and he said that the test
of our progress of a society is not whether we
add more to those with abundance, but whether we have
enough to those with the least. And then the other

(58:54):
would be Matthew twenty five forty, which is, you know,
as Jesus said, what you do to the least among you,
that you also so do to me, And that, to
me is the essence of what a democrat is. Is
that we care about people's schools and jobs, in livelihoods
and healthcare. And that is really really clear of why
I'm a Democrat. I don't think necessarily that Iowa is

(59:18):
like these other states and that you get out of
the urban communities and the term democrat or democratic is
a pejorative. I think we have a very, very long
history of being a progressive state. Third state to legalize
gay marriage.

Speaker 1 (59:33):
I say, I have a friend of mine that refers
to Iowa as the organ of the Midwest. We used
to do that about ten years ago. A little less
so lately, given that it has been a little less purple,
although I still think Iowa just was uniquely open to
Trump at a period of time when this economy was
just transitioning. I suspect Iowa was going to go back

(59:55):
to its swing swinginess pretty soon.

Speaker 2 (59:58):
I mean, we could certainly get into one of the
reasons why Iowa has shifted more than almost any other
state over the last ten years.

Speaker 1 (01:00:04):
And there's no state with more Obama to Trump counties,
no state. They're all at eastern Iowa. It's fascinating.

Speaker 2 (01:00:12):
You are absolutely correct. But here here's what I've said.
I've said that Iowa is a common sense state that
has masqueraded as a red state. And for you know,
you have to remember that for thirty years we had
we voted for Senator Harken, and that he ended in
twenty fourteen. That's not that long ago, but even more recently,

(01:00:32):
in Trump's first midterm twenty eighteen, we won three of
the four congressional seats, and we were only three points
away from winning every single one of the congressional races.
And I actually feel even more energy and excitement right
now for chance, particularly in the rural communities which they
have just been absolutely decimated and betrayed by the tariffs
and where the commodities prices are. You go to even

(01:00:53):
more recent history twenty twenty two, we were only one
point five percent away from having three of our sixth
state wide officials being Democrats. That means the average Iowa
voter went in there in twenty twenty two and voted
for three Democrats and three Republicans. We are not a
red state. We're a common sense state that has masqueraded
more red than what we actually are. And because everything

(01:01:15):
has perfectly aligned and we needed about ten things to happen,
but the fact that we've got, for the first time
since nineteen sixty eight, an open Senate race and an
open governor's race and two open congressional races, I really
do believe that Iowa was the center of the political
universe in twenty twenty six and you were going to
see the state shift.

Speaker 1 (01:01:34):
I've had some say to me, let me curious what
you think of this, And I'm probably playing to the
crowds on this one, which is the Iowa Democratic Party
got a little too Deminish and not enough everywhere else
that it was almost too concentrated in Des Moines. Do
you accept that premise. Do you think that was part
of the problem over the last decade.

Speaker 2 (01:01:55):
Yeah, I think that the not not only in Iowa,
but I think nationally, I think the the party has
has lost touch with the plights of real Americans or
the middle class or just the average worker.

Speaker 1 (01:02:08):
We're all real America the way. I always get a
little sensitive to that in fairness, urban Americans in rural America.
But I think what you're trying to say, and what
I would say when I would say this, and I
got and I'd fall into the same trap so I
didn't mean to which is it's really rural America that
Democrats just stopped showing up in and it's showing up.

(01:02:30):
This is why they've been alienated from rural America. It's
not that they're like, if you'd show up, they'd have
no problem, But this is where I think micro targeting
and the quote efficiency of use of dollars. Well, there's
more Democrats in the urban area. You got to get
out the got to get out the base vote. And
you're like, yeah, but if you shave three points in
rural America, then you have a better shot at urban America,

(01:02:52):
putting you over the finish line.

Speaker 2 (01:02:54):
Yeah, I think that that has certainly been a miscalculation. First,
I would say two things. I would say, you know,
having done this and winning in very, very red areas,
I say that the right candidate, with the right message
and the right work ethic, you can win in these
red environments because I've got the electoral experience that I've
I've done it, and the quality of candidacy can't be understated.

(01:03:18):
On that. I would also say that part of the
calculus is we do need candidates that are going to
be willing to go out there and go into all
ninety nine counties and go into all these small communities.
I think for far too long here in Iowa, over
the last ten years, we've had candidates say, well, we're
going to maximize turnout in Polk County and Johnson County

(01:03:39):
and Lynn County and that's how we're going to win.
But ultimately, we're a rule state, and it may not
make a fundamental difference in the outcomes in the statehouse races,
but we've got to trim the margins, and we've got
to get out there, and we've got to talk to
Republicans in these and independence in these rural communities and
explain why we're different. But we certainly can do that.
I mean, we have the opportunity in the messaging. I've

(01:04:02):
been able to prove it.

Speaker 1 (01:04:03):
You've you've already sort of touched on this issue that
I sort of discovered in twenty gosh, I think it
was it was I did a hole. I think it
was in twenty twenty one, twenty twenty two. We went
out to eastern Iowa to talk about sort of what
happened to you know, where did all the Democrats go
in eastern Iowa? And I was in Decora and in

(01:04:27):
some of these towns, and most of what we heard
was simply, you know, the only Democrat that showed up
in twenty twenty was Pete Booda Dite. You know, nobody
else did. And you're like, well, no, wonder he overperformed, right,
You know, now there was sort of a comfort level
for him. He was already a Midwesterner, so there was this,
you know, and he was sort of a fish out
of water in South Bend. And when you start out

(01:04:48):
as thinking of yourself as a fish out of water,
you sometimes overwork, right, And so he went to all
these places. But the other thing I discovered was there
was a lot of bullishness that well, Democrats are going
to be able to make a come back because of
what was happening in the schools. And it comes to
the sort of the choicification I guess of public schools

(01:05:09):
all over the country. Iowa was sort of following a
blueprint that Florida has in some of these other states
in the South. And the problem that I think Texas
Republicans are running into Iowa Republicans are running into is
school choice sounds great, But when you live where the
closest school is thirty is within, the next closes school
is thirty miles away, what choice do you have? And

(01:05:30):
so suddenly you're not fixing my school, but you've given
me choice to go find an alternative thirty miles away,
or I have to homeschool my kids. Walk me through
the choicification of the Iowa public school system right now
and how it did work and how it's working.

Speaker 2 (01:05:46):
At the moment. Yeah, this is certainly was a point
of personal pride for all Iowans. We were number one
in education.

Speaker 1 (01:05:55):
Always Massachusetts, in the East, Iowa and the Midwest, and
I think it would be like get out. Those were
always the three big, you know, great states for public schools.

Speaker 2 (01:06:04):
And this is why people were moving here. Our test
scores were the highest in the nation, and we prioritize that.
Even when we put out our state quarter, it was
it was about the quality of our education. And now,
unfortunately we have seen a precipitous drop and now we're
down to the middle of the pack on this issue.
Depending on the metric you're using, twenty six or even

(01:06:26):
thirty two, what's the drop.

Speaker 1 (01:06:28):
We spend it on testing, It's on testing and all
across the board.

Speaker 2 (01:06:32):
Yeah, yeah, test testing scores predominantly is where you're seeing it.
But one of the reasons is because we're no longer
prioritizing this or funding this. We now spend twelve hundred
dollars less than the national average per pupil here in
Iowa and in the Iowa legislature. Unfortunately now with what
we've seen with vouchers. Last year, we gave our public
schools a two percent increase and we gave our private

(01:06:53):
schools a forty four percent increase in funding. And in
what you're seeing is you're seeing rules schools that are
legitimately struggling and closing. And it I mean, it's, it's, it's,
it's it's very very serious. When these rural communities, you
only have really four pillars of these rural communities, and

(01:07:13):
that would be your rural pharmacies which are closing. And
then you're seeing rural schools closing due to the lack
of funding. And we're giving private schools and there are
no private schools in these rural communities, no.

Speaker 1 (01:07:22):
And what you potentially do is you you you you
almost incentivize some bad actors who try to open up
sort of you know, essentially government funded private schooling where
they get tax breaks and all this stuff. They grab
the money and they don't give your kid a good
education and there's nobody there to make sure they're following
the rules. Or you get parents start homeschooling and it

(01:07:46):
and that's hard, you know, I think many a parent
wants to do that well and in a dream world
in some ways somebody you know. But it's not as
easy as you make it.

Speaker 2 (01:07:57):
Out to me.

Speaker 1 (01:07:57):
And I admire those that do it, but it's it
ain't easy.

Speaker 2 (01:08:02):
Absolutely, and there are so many rural communities now that
are struggling with this. And and and even more egregiously
is that we can't audit the schools and so there's
there's no regulation on what they teach. There's no regulation
in terms of it. It's your tax dollars being used there.
You go your your your tax dollars. And yet then

(01:08:23):
there's there's no standard on testing. They can spend the
money how they want. They can spend it on pupils,
they can spend it on football equipment if they want.
And then most most egregiously for me is there's no
discrimination policies in place. And so if a kid needs
an IEP, or he has a visible disability or whatever
his situation is, the private schools can say no, sorry,

(01:08:44):
we can't take you, which just puts that onus more
on the public schools which are having less and less funding.

Speaker 1 (01:08:51):
Right and department. This is one thing people always ask,
what does the national Department of Education do help public
schools the funding so that they can provide services to
students who may need some extra help in order.

Speaker 2 (01:09:05):
To get particularly with those with disabilities and special education.

Speaker 1 (01:09:08):
It's always been a foundational support. So you get rid
of this, and where's this going to go? I mean,
I hate to be politically cynical about this, but I
think this has opened the door to having a different
conversation in rural America than Democrats have been having over
the last decade.

Speaker 2 (01:09:25):
Yeah, and I mean this is this is just kind
of unfortunately a perfect storm in these rural communities where
you're just you're you're seeing young people not stick around.
As I was saying before, you've got four pillars in
these rural communities.

Speaker 1 (01:09:39):
You've got the rural pharmacy. That's an interesting issue, you're right,
I mean.

Speaker 2 (01:09:42):
Rural pharmacies. They're being hurt by the by the PBMs.
And then you've got your public your your schools which
are closing because of the lack of funding, and we're
putting the funding towards the private schools, which you're only
in the urban areas. And then you've got rural hospitals
and in a place like Iowa, You've got two and
five eldes in the rural communities that are on Medicaid.

(01:10:03):
In the last five years, we have close thirty one
nursing homes skilled nursing facilities in rural hospitals due to
lack of reimbursement and lack of funding. It is really
hurting these these communities. Then you exasperate that with what
we're seeing on the tariffs and the commodities prices, where
these you know, we're losing our family farms and you're
seeing farm suicides and foreclosure rates that are going up.

(01:10:25):
I mean, we really is moving us into almost a
a second farm crisis of what we saw in the
in the nineteen eighties. Unfortunately, where are you on.

Speaker 1 (01:10:34):
Tariffs because I think that you know, in Iowa famously,
you know, you know, ag tariffs were you'd be in
one some some politicians would be on one side of
the aisle for against all tariffs on AG because that
was such a huge export. But then on manufacturing you'd
have you know, particularly a Tom Harkett might be for
some of these tariffs.

Speaker 2 (01:10:54):
Maybe it's on.

Speaker 1 (01:10:54):
Washing machines or dishwashers because those things used to be made.

Speaker 2 (01:10:59):
You know, there was a.

Speaker 1 (01:11:00):
Time that certain towns were known not by their name
but by the plant. Right, Oh, it's a make tag town, right,
you know you'd have that, or oh it's a popcorn town,
or it's a popcorn popping plant. And where are you?
You know, do you think all tariffs are bad? When
are there tariffs that are out there that you support?

(01:11:23):
Where do you put yourself on the issue.

Speaker 2 (01:11:25):
No, I would tend to agree with you. I mean,
certainly not all tariffs are bad. I think you can
make the argument that at least in the manufacturing sector,
to have some level of parody or competition, they can
be valuable. But certainly, what we're seeing right now with
this chaotic terriffs where you know, you're seeing shifts from
from day to day, and you know, one day it's
one hundred percent tariffs, and they have really really hurt

(01:11:48):
the gag communities, and that's being doubled down where Trump's
giving forty billion dollars to Argentina to bail them out
so that the Chinese can buy their soybeans. Meanwhile our
farmers are left there to hold the bag and they're
upside down on their soybeans. It really, really is hurting
our eg communities. And I think that when I'm out
there and I've been out to a lot of farms,

(01:12:10):
we're hearing farmers that are really, really concerned that we've
already lost a majority of our family farms and what
few remain out there. Yeah, suicide rates are three times
higher than what they were over the last two years.
Foreclosure rates are double what they were last year. It's
moving us towards the farm crisis, and this has been
a self inflicted womb due to this chaotic nature of

(01:12:32):
the terraffs. I believe that tariffs should be as the
founders of the Constitution intended, with the power of the
legislature and much like the power of the purse.

Speaker 1 (01:12:41):
So one of the things that frustrates longtime Iolands is
the idea it's a shrinking population state, right that I
remember when you know that there have been multiple governors
who said, you know, my goal is to you know,
I'm during the heyday of the public school system. Hey,
we're educating all these kids and they're leaving. You know,
they're they're leaving the state. They're not staying. What's the

(01:13:05):
what's your plan to get more folks to want to
stay in Iowa. What's the job what's the job market
look like the next thirty years in Iowa? And and
what is what should Iowa be an investing in to
make it to make it such a because it's always
been seen as a pretty livable right, it's a it's
a very livable place to moin in particular. So you know,

(01:13:25):
if you're looking for a small city, but what city life,
the Moin's about as affordable place as you can.

Speaker 2 (01:13:31):
Live in the Midwest.

Speaker 1 (01:13:33):
But what's the next what are the next thirty years
of jobs look like in Iowa? Because I do think
Iowa's are nervous about the future.

Speaker 2 (01:13:41):
Yeah, they they certainly are. Unfortunately, we're the only state
in the last one hundred years and hasn't doubled in
population size, and even for the for the young people
that we have, oftentimes we're educating them and then they
go on. The first thing is we've we've we've got
to start going the right direction, particularly in rural communities.
As I said, uh, you know, we've we've got to
have the healthcare system in place. We're basically dead last

(01:14:02):
right now in Iowa for every single economic metric, I mean,
for all intents and purposes, we're already in a recession.
We've seen a six percent reduction in GDP. We're forty
ninth in terms of economic growth, forty eight out of
fifty in terms of individual purchasing in economic growth. By

(01:14:24):
every single healthcare metric, we're basically dead last. Rural hospitals, obgyns,
mental health providers, mental health reimbursements. You have to have
these systems in place to want for this to be
a livable situation as well, if you want people to
move here to Iowa. So I agree, it's a beautiful
statement all around the world. I love Iowa. It's great,

(01:14:45):
Iowa nice, it's affordable even, you know, it's amazing place.
But you've got to have these systems in place from
education and healthcare, and also what we're seeing with some
of these social issues where we've moved to a six
weeks abortion ban and in some of these culture war
issues where we've we've just not made this state very

(01:15:07):
welcoming to to a lot of individuals. And you know,
it's interesting with what we're doing on immigration as well,
it's made it made it less welcoming to to immigrant communities.

Speaker 1 (01:15:24):
You know, it's interesting with with Iowa and how it's
gotten the sideways and cultural issues is that, you know,
my father grew up the you know, the Midwest Methodist,
which means, you know, I always joke Methodists are you know,
people who are Christians but don't want to talk about it,
you know, but but you know, meaning like you know,

(01:15:44):
your your faith is your faith. You don't wear it
on your sleeve. What you wear on your sleeve is
your values, right, It's it's you know, your values, is
being good to your neighbor, empathy, things like that. And
yet there's this perception that i was a very religious state.
And yet I did see something recently that compared to
the rest of the Midwest, it is actually has the least.

(01:16:06):
It's on a downward trajectory of people that go every
week to some sort of religious service. What have you
discovered out there campaigning statewide?

Speaker 2 (01:16:19):
I mean, most states are on a downward trajectory in
terms of that. But I still think that Iowa is
a religious state. I think the most recent numbers I've
seen was sixty five percent of Violins still a tend
church on a regular basis or would define themselves as
Christian or members of religious organization, and certainly that's something

(01:16:42):
that I'm going to incorporate in this campaign. I'm somebody
that has born and raised and proudly spiritual and would
defined myself as a Christian in the true sense of
the word. And I'm going to go out there. There's
three things that Republicans that have, as I feel like
they've had a stranglehold on, that they're not going to
be able to use against me. The first is hard work,

(01:17:04):
because every single part of my story, from overcoming economic situations,
the healthcare situations that I've gone through, also to win
gold medals, but then even to win my election in
a very very deeply read district, going out there every
single day and dragging my wheelchair upstairs has been about
hard work. The second is I think that Republicans have

(01:17:27):
felt like they've been able to have a stranglehold on patriotism,
and I'm someone that is deeply patriotic. I love Iowa,
I love my country. I have proudly represented the United
States in four Paralympic Games and won gold medals, and
so I don't think they'll be able to use that.
And the third is, as we were talking about with
this is on spirituality or on religion. I feel like
there has been this push that if you're a Democrat,

(01:17:49):
you cannot be religious or spiritual, if you're Christian, you
must have to be Republican. And I'm going to go
out there and actively talk about Matthew twenty five forty
and that the true message of Jesus is taking care
of the most vulnerable in society and the poor and
the elderly and the disabled. It's one of the main
reasons why I am a Democrat.

Speaker 1 (01:18:11):
Let me go through a few questions that you're look,
you know that could get weaponized against you. Fair, unfair?
The issue of trans sports and access, what what?

Speaker 2 (01:18:25):
What should that?

Speaker 1 (01:18:26):
What's fair to the trans community when it comes to
access to organized sports, true school, college, et cetera. I mean,
I say this and I feel like you actually have
in some ways of a better you know, you benefited
from having access for for adaptive sports. So what's the
right I don't know if there's a right answer. What
do you think is the right way to think about

(01:18:47):
this issue? I mean the first is I think we
need to be empathetic on this issue. I mean, the
children that are involved in this, they're they're really in
a no win situation, is somebody that you know has
gone through a lot of bullying and adversity in my life,
you know, being different with the disability. We need to
recognize that, you know.

Speaker 2 (01:19:05):
Sports is a unique area of dedicated a lot of
my life to this, and we certainly need fairness and
involved in this. However, I would say that you know,
I have personal experience with this. I actually I wanted
to try out for my team in high school and
play basketball, and yet there was an equipment rule that
prevented me from being able to play. And yet it

(01:19:27):
was not my congressman, or my mayor or my senator
that was making the decision on this issue. It was
the sports governing bodies. And so my position on this
is that this should be decided by the sports governing
bodies and politicians shouldn't be involved in this conversation. Don't don't.
I don't think my position is a United States centator

(01:19:48):
I should be involved in this.

Speaker 1 (01:19:50):
That it should be Should a high school principal have
to make.

Speaker 2 (01:19:55):
Sports governing bodies? I don't think it should be left
up to local control. I think you leave it up
to sports governing body.

Speaker 1 (01:20:01):
Socialism versus capitalism. You know, the the excitement that the
progressives have about the victory of Zoon Mamdani. He's a
self described democratic socialist. There's the every political party claims
they're a big tent when they have people in there
that that they that not everybody agrees, and I get that,

(01:20:22):
But where are you on socialism versus capitalism? And I
ask a plurality the most recent NBC News poll, It's
a poll that I'm very familiar with, and I know
it's really well done. Democrats were the only group that
had a net positive rating on socialism and a net
negative rating on capitalism. A why do you think that is?

(01:20:43):
And where do you put yourself on that spectrum?

Speaker 2 (01:20:45):
Well, I would define myself as a capitalist. I think
capitalism is the greatest vehicle ever devised by man to
be able to generate capital. However, it's very inefficient at
being able to divide that that that capitalism, So I'm
certainly not a las fair capitalist. I think that you know,
you need a regulated capitalism and a progressive taxation rate.

(01:21:08):
I mean, honestly, when something's been fascinating to me, again
representing very red district, and you talk, I'm not talking
most exclusive Republicans, they'll this whole entire MAGA movement make
America great again. Well, what they're talking about with that
is they're talking about America post World two, arguably at
our zenith. And I'm sure i'm preaching the choir to

(01:21:28):
you on this, but when you're talking about America post
World two nineteen fifties, you're talking about the where we
had the most amount of union membership and the strengths
of our unions, and the unions built the middle class.
But we also had the most progressive taxation rate. That
was when the highest earners were paying a marginalized tax

(01:21:48):
rate of ninety one percent, and during the Eisenhearer administration
and the largest corporations were we're paying fifty one percent.
And we've eroded that we are literally living through a
second Gilded Age right now in this country. And it has,
i mean all the way back to John Edwards when
you talked about we're living in two Americas, the haves
and the have nots, and it was a better head.

Speaker 1 (01:22:08):
That speech is funny when you think about that speech.
He gave an four and oh eight constantly, and being
in Iowa and right you heard it a million times.
We all heard it. You know, we live in two Americas.
We are now we are living in It's more I
was just going to say the speech. Weirdly, it is
more resident now than it was that.

Speaker 2 (01:22:24):
If you make over one hundred thousand dollars right now,
I think you're feeling pretty good.

Speaker 1 (01:22:28):
And especially a little money in the stock market, you're like, hey,
this is great, my savings is working for me. But
what if you don't have savings?

Speaker 2 (01:22:34):
That's right, but you can't have a more disconnect. The
disconnect between Wall Street and Main Street can't be more clear.
And it really is the haves and the have nots.
And there's too many people right now in Iowa right
now that are in the have nots section that are
struggling just to keep food on the table and pay
their bills, and struggling with affordability of healthcare and pharmaceuticals

(01:22:57):
and all of it. And this is what we need.
We need to genuine prairie populist. And you know, we
used to have prairie populous We no longer in the
US have those because we don't have senators from Iowa
in the Dakotas in Nebraska and We need somebody that's
going to go out there and fight for the people.

Speaker 1 (01:23:13):
The issue of climate change is something that's really important
to a certain subset. Look do I think it should
be important to a large subset of hope, but politically
it's important to a smaller subset these days. And I'm
sure you're getting plenty of advice that says, hey, don't
you know these issues, these are not these are not
front and center. And yet I think rising electric bills,

(01:23:36):
the data centers that are that are going to be
going online, that are going to impact our ability to
that are basically going to a competition for electricity, which
is inevitably is going to raise rates. Is there is
there a way to be sort of to to mitigate
the damage coming from extreme weather and at the same
time not look like you're coming out against the economy.

Speaker 2 (01:24:00):
You get my drift. I think, like with most things,
how I define myself as a common sense I mean, one, yeah,
certainly climate change exists, and it's and it's happening in
where you may see those effects most most directly is
actually in the yag communities and where we're seeing.

Speaker 1 (01:24:16):
The southwest Iowa, the flooding. You know, one hundred year
floods that come every couple of years.

Speaker 2 (01:24:20):
It's it's it's it's the flooding, it's the extreme heat.
And then when you're seeing these rain showers which which
are just coming down in torrents and knocking down the
row crops, it is affecting us in a very very
serious way. And also, Iowa, we have always been a
leaders in renewable fuels, renewable energy. We have the second

(01:24:44):
most amount of our energy grid that is from renewable energy,
the most of the vast majority of that is through wind.
And I think that there's a way where we can
address this without uh without stifling growth or innovation or
or the economy. And certain one of the best ways
is certainly through that through through wind energy, and continuing

(01:25:04):
those incentives and subsidies through the through the federal government,
certainly at the state level.

Speaker 1 (01:25:09):
Two, being a US senator means you're going to be
dabbling more in foreign policy than the campaign itself will
be about. And I imagine if a foreign policy issue
comes up, it's going to be the issue of Israel.
Where are you on US support for Israel?

Speaker 2 (01:25:23):
Yeah, I mean, certainly, I'm hopeful that we're going to
see a peaceful end too that I think we're all
hopeful for that. What has happened there in Gaza has
been horrific. The amount of loss of life into civilians
and to children, it really has been horrific. I think

(01:25:44):
that Israel certainly had the right to defend itself, but
I think that now the response is certainly, by any metric,
been disproportionate. And I think that we need to make
sure that any sort of support or arm cells comes
with the insurance that we're adhering to international law.

Speaker 1 (01:26:06):
You put a little more, a few more guardrails on
arm sales, yeah.

Speaker 2 (01:26:09):
I particularly put particularly on offensive weapons.

Speaker 1 (01:26:14):
And as Ukraine our fight, what would you say to somebody,
is that our fight? And if it is, why is
it our fight? In your in your words, I think
it's I think there's certainly a distinction there.

Speaker 2 (01:26:25):
I think that what's happened is they they have been
invaded by but an authoritarian regime with with Putin, and
I think that that is one of the examples where
we should probably stand in in in and fight with
them and uh, because that that is that is a
distinction they have, that is a sovereign country that has

(01:26:46):
been invaded by a foreign power, and and that is
that is an area where we should.

Speaker 1 (01:26:51):
Support one that might be a little closer to home.
College sports, it is gone through dramatic chain. Iowa was
on the halves. I worry that Iowa State, where my
grandparents both got degrees. By the way, are their cyclone
alums they might be have nots because they're in one

(01:27:13):
conference and I was in a super conference. There's always
been this talk that Congress is going to have to
get involved. Do you think they need to? And as
somebody who's you know, look, you know, one side of
the state loves their Hawkeys, the other side of state
loves their Cyclones.

Speaker 2 (01:27:30):
But the fact is Iowa State.

Speaker 1 (01:27:32):
Is essentially getting punished because Texas left the Big twelve.
Is there a role here for the Senate? And do
you think there should be?

Speaker 2 (01:27:43):
Maybe I'm I'm I'm torn. I maybe sports should be separate,
But I do know the history of the NCAA. You know,
one of the reasons why that was created was just
because of with football, we are seeing all all the
violence in the you know, unfortunate even loss of life.

Speaker 1 (01:28:00):
Early on, they were trying to ring Teddy Roosevelt. It
basically was created, you know, by Teddy Roosevelt.

Speaker 2 (01:28:04):
In order to say that that is exactly correct. I
mean what we're seeing with the the nil I mean,
this has just turned into the laws a fair there,
and there's no regulation, and I think honestly that they
missed an opportunity. You know, my brother and sister both
played professional able body of basketball. My sister had a
brief cup of coffee with the w NBA, and so
they were They both were four year starters, my brother Nebraska,

(01:28:26):
my sister at L. Robert University, and they honestly, they
struggled just to have money, just to do their laundry.
And we missed an opportunity there to find some happy
medium where we could at least take care of our
athletes or at least that they had some level of
control over their name, image and likeness. But what we're
seeing now, which is millions and millions of dollars dumping

(01:28:49):
into this and no guardrails and no regulation, it may
be a need for the Senate or for the government
to get involved.

Speaker 1 (01:28:57):
Do you get a sense that Iowa State basically partisans
are nervous that that you know that suddenly you know,
if i and Iowa State can't play every year because
of the financial demands of the Big ten that want
them playing in other games like that, that is something
that's really good at tick Off Islands.

Speaker 2 (01:29:16):
Yeah, I just it's it's it's interesting. It's almost I
feel like our college sports has almost moved into what
we're seeing with with our country and our economics, where
we've got the handful, We've got a handful of these
and with football in particular, it's the SEC and it's
the Big ten that are the haves, and they've got
all the TV money, and those are just going to

(01:29:37):
continue to generate more and more.

Speaker 1 (01:29:39):
It's kind of a monopoly. It's not even a meritocracy.
It feels like a monopoly. And that's of course what
what what we're seeing here with AI and and what
we're seeing with the big tech in the.

Speaker 2 (01:29:50):
Moment correct And I mean look again to get back
to us talking about the second as being in Gilded
Age at least one hundred years ago. In the first
Gilded Age, we hadlegislators that stood that stood up to
this and to the Rockfellers and the Vanderbilts and and
the JP Morgans and we we broke up standard oil,
and we know, we recognize that these monopolies were no

(01:30:11):
good for society to have one percent controlling all the
economic wealth. And out of that Gilded Age, we ended
up coming up with Franklin Delan and Roosevelt and the
New Deal and you know, the advent of social security
and social safety nets for individuals. I'm hopeful that this
is an opportunity here for us in this country, and
particularly in this upcoming election, for us to make that

(01:30:31):
shift and to to to actually have more people that
are going to be genuine populous. They're going to fight
for the middle class and fight for economic populism, and
we can change our country.

Speaker 1 (01:30:44):
All right, Totally easy questions for you know, he's got
the best. Who's who's going to be the best college
basketball team from Iowa this year? Who's going to go
the furthest in the tournament?

Speaker 2 (01:30:57):
I would probably guess the Hawk guys is that's.

Speaker 1 (01:31:02):
Yeah, i Alowa State doesn't have as good of a
ball club this year.

Speaker 2 (01:31:05):
Oh they may, they may. It's but I'll say who
I think is going to go furthest in the tournament?
I think the Hawkeys. However, I'll say this Drake Man,
oh Man, They've they've had they've had good results with
at least making the tournament, which is Drake.

Speaker 1 (01:31:20):
And you and I. There's some pretty good supposed mid
major teams right now.

Speaker 2 (01:31:24):
That is right. I mean half the battles just get
into the tournament. I mean that that has been also
interesting too with this shift in sports. On the football
you've seen more of, but have and have not actually
on the basketball side of things, I think you can
make the argument where some of these teams, because you're
seeing guys that are going in there and they're just
staying one year and then they're entering the transfer pooral

(01:31:45):
or the better athletes are going off to the NBA,
I think you can make the argument that some of
these mid majors that are able to keep their guys
for three or four or five years, they're able to
compete in an interesting way against these you know, the haves, so.

Speaker 1 (01:31:57):
Seniors four your guys that are grow up together for
four years in the same program. One hundred percent. I'm
a witch of GW.

Speaker 2 (01:32:04):
SERI matters.

Speaker 1 (01:32:04):
That's that's our plan, that's the GW blueprint. That's how
they think we can we can be the next you know,
the next Gonzaga, the next Wichita State, right right, that
can pop in there. Let me get you out of
here on this what's uh? On the NBA level? Who's
your favorite basketball player to watch?

Speaker 2 (01:32:21):
Oh, I'm I'm a big fan of Jokich, what he's
been able to do.

Speaker 1 (01:32:25):
You like that, you like the the the high IQ player, right.

Speaker 2 (01:32:31):
I just kind of like unicorns. I just like watching
anything at the very highest level. I'm a shooter, you know.
I mean, I think I had said to you, I
am I cleaed to career four thousand, career points, sixty
three points in the uh. So that was always my
skill set. So watching somebody like Steph Curry that has
been able to master that that unique skills. I love the.

Speaker 1 (01:32:52):
Mayor man Fred Hoiberg. Right, he was a big shooter
back in his day.

Speaker 2 (01:32:55):
Yeah that's right, Yeah, of course. But I mean it's
like these individuals are able to do it in a
very unique way at a high level. In Jokich, particularly
with his physical appearance, you know, as he's just kind
of lumbering down the court, but that level of coordination
that he that he has, it really is it's sensational.
I really love watching him.

Speaker 1 (01:33:16):
It's such a high flying sport. To see him not
get an inch off the ground is fantastic. It's my
favorite gree I love that. Who's your goat.

Speaker 2 (01:33:26):
For the NBA?

Speaker 1 (01:33:27):
Yeah, who do you put in the goat?

Speaker 2 (01:33:29):
Do you have a goat?

Speaker 1 (01:33:30):
Do you have a hot take on goat? Between Jordan Lebron,
I got a hot take that involves Magic Johnson. But
that's my hot take or you know.

Speaker 2 (01:33:38):
Well, here I will tell you my goat, but I'll
tell you my Mount Rushmore. My goat without a doubt
is Jordan. I mean as a kid watching growing up,
watching him play six championships, six and zero. But I
also think you can make the argument for someone like
Bill Russell eleven championships in thirteen years. I don't know
if we'll ever see anything like that. Wilt Chamberlain. I mean,

(01:33:59):
if you just look at the individual stat lines, he
averaged fifty points in a seasons going over one hundred.

Speaker 1 (01:34:06):
Was one of the greatest volleyball players of all time
as well.

Speaker 2 (01:34:08):
By the way, without a doubt, I mean, this was
a guy that for a season actually averaged more minutes
than even an NBA game has. He averaged like forty
eight point three minutes in the game. Those would be
those would be the ones that would be up there
for me.

Speaker 1 (01:34:23):
Yeah, well, Josh, this was great. Good luck out there.
I mean, are you any question quickly hit me up.

Speaker 2 (01:34:32):
What do you think about Iowa? I mean, like you,
I mean, you're you're You're as close to this as
is almost anybody. You're seeing this unique opportunity that we've got,
you know, first time since nineteen sixty eight, open governor's race,
open race, two open congressional races. In Trump's first midterm,
we won three of the four, and we've got a
great candidate with somebody like Rob sand that is similar

(01:34:52):
to me in terms of leaning into the middle. What
do you think about Iowa and us being the center
of the political universe or this being a fundamental change
in our life?

Speaker 1 (01:35:00):
Well, I think it is one of those where if
if the Democrats want to be a national party, and
I would argue that they've not been a national party
since Obama and the sort of the got taken over
by a consultant class that got I've always said, you know,
analytics was a you know, the the analytics revolution that

(01:35:23):
hit politics and sports and all this stuff where people
let data drive decisions. Sometimes data can be exclusive, meaning
it excludes people because it's efficiencies that analytics is looking for. Well,
we found out the efficiencies of baseball made the game suck,
and so we had it like and the efficiencies of

(01:35:43):
politics actually made got rid of persuasion. We start the
art of persuasion. Iowa only works with persuasion, right. It's
why the caucuses, I think are such a unique thing
and why Iowans took it seriously. I'm sorry the Democratic
Party only views Iowa through an identity issue, and I

(01:36:04):
think that is what offended some islands. I really believe
that that when the Democratic Party nationally said, you know,
I was too white, Well what do you think that
said to the residents? You don't want us in your club?

Speaker 2 (01:36:18):
Okay?

Speaker 1 (01:36:19):
And then you wonder, oh, well now I was out
of range. Well you just told eighty percent of the
population you didn't want them involved because they were too white.
It was a strange, and I know that isn't I
understood what the DNC was trying to say. But anyway, look,
I'm I think that if not now, when right, if

(01:36:40):
the Iowa Democrats can't make a comeback, in this environment,
under these circumstances, with everything that's there, right, if it
doesn't happen, the party's brand is even in worse shape
than I thought. I look at Iowa as this test
if the Democrats are and I most look, I'm a believer.
I live in history, so everything is cyclical, right, it

(01:37:03):
just is. You know, Harkin first got elected in the
seventy four Watergate class, right, and it was Iowa had
a very Republican reputation before then, and that's sort of
when when sort of the Iowa Democrats started to get
more competitive. But it is a.

Speaker 2 (01:37:20):
If.

Speaker 1 (01:37:20):
If there isn't success this time, then it is not
your fault or Rob's fault or the fault of the
folks on the ground. It really is the national brand.
Right if you can, if you can rebrand an Iowa
Democrat is something that isn't associated with the national party.
I think you have a boxer's chance because if you

(01:37:44):
but you have to show up everywhere in the beauty
of Iowa. Is it's kind of expected, right, the ninety
nine counties, the fact that everybody that covers Iowa politics,
even if you're not from Iowa, you know there are
ninety nine counties. Do you know how many other states
people know that they're the number of counties are in
that outside of people that live in that state nowhere, right,
Iowa has it, And so I do think, you know,

(01:38:06):
for whatever reason, you just had a and I think
if you look at the leadership of the Democratic Party,
it's too coastal.

Speaker 2 (01:38:13):
Right.

Speaker 1 (01:38:13):
It wasn't that long ago that the Democratic Party was
first that had a Senate Democratic leader from South Dakota,
and then it was replaced by a Senate Democratic leader
who was born and raised in rural Nevada. Like literally
the towns that outside of Vegas, there are five of
them that exist, right, I'm being a little facetious. So
you know, this is one of those things where literally

(01:38:35):
the Democratic Party left Iowa. Iowa didn't leave the Democratic Party.
And we'll find out if Iowans are open to this
version of the party. But I look at it, I
think what's happened with the schools and the funding cuts.
I hear it from a lot of my friends in
rural Iowa about how you know, even if culturally they

(01:38:57):
were supportive of the idea of private schools, and there
was this epticism to the public schools. The way this
is work doesn't work for people.

Speaker 2 (01:39:04):
Right.

Speaker 1 (01:39:04):
Ultimately, people want their local school to work and they
want to have a say over their local school, right.

Speaker 2 (01:39:09):
They want both things.

Speaker 1 (01:39:12):
So look, I mean, I'm I'm I'm biased. I've spent
a lot of time in Iowa. My my wife worked
in Iowa. We've you know, we both care about the
state a lot. Like I said, I've got more family
buried in Iowa than any of the state in the Union.
So I've always taken pride on what sort of a
bipartisan state it's always has been, and it was always
a point of pride. My father's was a big conservative,

(01:39:34):
grew up in Waterloo. It was a point of pride
that Iowa was this swing state. That's right, because Iowan's
worry about the person at the party, and there was
always that there was a bit of a there was
always pride in that the independent streak of Iowa. So look,
I'm a I'm bullish in theory, but you got to

(01:39:55):
have good candidates.

Speaker 2 (01:39:57):
There without a doubt. And this is one of the
things that I've learned representing, you know, such a red district,
is this comes down to right candidate, right message, and
that message is genuine economics, timing matter, and the right
work ethic. I think you can win, and we do.
I mean, we're basically dead last by every single economic
and healthcare metric. And as you said, this is a

(01:40:17):
huge opportunity, but it's a lot of responsibility we get
this right because if we cannot win in this environment,
then this state may be gone for a generation.

Speaker 1 (01:40:26):
And because if Republicans can win in this environment, then
then they're going to govern for quite some time. I mean,
I don't know if you've spent much time with Mike
Franken in the race he ran, you know, he was
just totally I mean, you want to talk about identity politics,
just eliminating him from consideration by the National Party. And

(01:40:48):
it turned out he was the stronger candidate because he
won the primary despite the National Party supporting somebody else.
So what I would say is be careful when that
when you think the national parties on your side, they
don't always make the smartest decisions.

Speaker 2 (01:41:00):
That's fair. And the other thing that you said that
one hundred percent agree with is that we've got to
make our own identity of what is an Iowa Democrat.
I think that one of the One of the advantages
that like a state above us in Minnesota has had
is they've been able to make the distinction with we
are the farm and Labor Party. And I think that
if we had that ability to say we are the
party of the American class, that the middle who.

Speaker 1 (01:41:22):
Says you have to keep the name Iowa Democrats, who
says you can't become the Iowa Democratic Farm Labor I mean,
I you know, I've had a few people ask me
this and I'm like, yeah, I you know, rebrand if
the part if the Democrats is going to be a
coalition party, and most look, we're we're a country two parties.
Nobody goes to the store and only takes and there's

(01:41:43):
only two choices of t shirt sizes extra small and
extra large. Right, Like the idea that we try to
squeeze everybody into two parties, it's absurd. We probably should
be a four or a four party system. I think
it would frankly sort of ease the ease some of
the tension inside both parties. You know where you have
these giant where the tent is so big it rips

(01:42:06):
a hole in the middle, right, And that's kind of
what I think has happened to the Democrats. You've got
these pro democracy ex Republicans on one side, and you've
got the Bernie Sanders democratic socialists on the other. And
they only agree on one thing, Trump is bad for democracy.
Other than that, they've got nothing else in common. That's
a tough coalition to win with on.

Speaker 2 (01:42:25):
Bread and butter issues.

Speaker 1 (01:42:26):
And I don't know why other state parties haven't actually
followed the lead of Minnesota. Now Minnesota, there used to
be separate parties. There was a Democratic Party and there
was a farm Labor Party, and then they merged. That's
sort of the history of that. But I've been surprised, Like,
if I were an Idaho Democrat, I just rebrand the
party the Idaho Freedom Party or something, you know where
you know, sometimes words you know are words you don't

(01:42:49):
use anymore in certain locations. Okay, move on, your ideas
can still work.

Speaker 2 (01:42:55):
This is interesting though, because we were I think we're
seeing a schism actually on both parties. I mean the Democrats,
as you indicated, but you also see this amongst classical
conservatives and also what is a maga Republican and.

Speaker 1 (01:43:07):
So well, it's the same divide, you know, Josh. That
divide existed before, it just was so dormant during the
Cold War. The isolationist wing, you know, which was borderline
xenophobic back in the nineteen thirties, and they were like, hey,
we're not going to get involved in other people's wars.
And they were the ones that held the American Americans
back from participating in World War Two until it came

(01:43:30):
to our shores. Right, we wouldn't have gotten involved until
it hit us, because that Republican Party was more trumpy
in the FDR era than Eisenhower, right, and then the
Eisenhower to Romney run of Republicans, they were all sort
of internationalists, and yet they're the Yeah, I don't think

(01:43:50):
they're dead.

Speaker 2 (01:43:51):
They're just in hibernation at that wing of the party.
I enjoyed this. Thank you so much for good to
get to know you.

Speaker 1 (01:44:04):
All right, hope you enjoyed that conversation. I am sticking
with my theme of all things twenty twenty six, as
I promised you. It's a top five.

Speaker 2 (01:44:12):
It's time.

Speaker 1 (01:44:12):
It's Wednesday, which means I have a new top five list.
Top five top.

Speaker 2 (01:44:22):
It's an update. Right.

Speaker 1 (01:44:24):
A month ago I debuted my top five most likely
governor's seats to flip parties. And at that time this
was October, which meant the Virginia and New Jersey races
were part of my top five. And just to recount
my top five in October of races most likely to

(01:44:44):
change of governor's seats or governor's mansions, however you want
to describe it, most likely to flip parties, number one
was Virginia, Number two was Kansas, number three was Wisconsin,
number four was Michigan, and number five was Iowa. Now
what do all five of those races have in common.
They're all open seats. And as I will say every
time I talk about governor's races, one of the hard

(01:45:07):
the hardest things to do in politics is to defeat
a sitting governor after they've served only one term. It
just rarely happens. Frank Murkowski is one of the few
examples where it happened, when Sarah Palin defeated Lisa Markowski's
father in a primary after he had served one term.
But it is not easy. Joe Lombardo defeated Governor Sicilac

(01:45:32):
out of Steve Sicilac out of Nevada in twenty twenty
two not the easiest thing to defeat a sitting of
the only I think he was the only incumbent to
lose statewide on the Democratic side in twenty twenty two
Senate or governor. So that is that is just how

(01:45:53):
difficult it is voters in general, unless they really can't
stand their governor and they do something sort of is
something that they never thought that they would do. And
in sisilex Casey shut down the strip right like, get know,
that's why he lost reelection. He shut the strip down
during COVID and that had all sorts of massive economic
fallout for Nevada residents, which explains the point is you're

(01:46:17):
my top five list will likely not include a sitting governor.
In fact, I think if if you're wondering which incumbent
governor is the most vulnerable in the country, I will
tell you it is Katie Hobbs in Arizona. Of all
the incumbent governors seeking reelection, she's probably at the most vulnerable.

(01:46:40):
She narrowly won over Carrie Lake the first time. She's
not the most front facing candidate she is. There isn't
going to be a Senate race that becomes the bigger
attention seeker. Her race is going to be the front
and center race in swing state Arizona. And if Congressman

(01:47:01):
David Schweikert, who has represented a swing district in Arizona,
ends up the Republican nominee, I think she's in for
a real nail buyer. So I will say she does
not make my top five at the moment of five
most vulnerable to flip because I will tell you there's
a whole bunch more open seats that are more likely
to flip parties first before we get to Arizona.

Speaker 2 (01:47:24):
But if you.

Speaker 1 (01:47:25):
Told me sometime between now and next November, Arizona makes
it into my top five, it would be the one
state with an incumbent governor that I think that it's
likely to do that. So with that said, my top
five number one now, and I think it's fair to
put this it's Kansas.

Speaker 2 (01:47:45):
Now.

Speaker 1 (01:47:46):
It's interesting. I have a little update on Kansas lor Kelly,
who's term limited, and it is worth noting that Democrats
have had the governor's office sixteen of the last twenty
four years. Right had Kathleen Sibilius, then you had and
you had your eight years of brown back, and then
you had eight years of lor Kelly. Now she has

(01:48:10):
endorsed her successor, a state Senator by the name of
Ethan Carson. Excuse me, Ethan Corson c O R S
O N. My apologies there. She claims that he's going
to be that he's the Democrat, he's in a primary,
but that he's the Democrat best position to continue to

(01:48:31):
appeal to sort of moderate Republicans and independents, which is
what lor Kelly has successfully done in order to win.
In Kansas. We'll see Kathleen Sibilius had her own successor
and that person couldn't win. So look, I do think
you're likely to see the windshield wiper effect take place
in Kansas, which is why you've got to make It's

(01:48:54):
somewhat of a crowded Republican primary, but I think it's
fair to put the you got to put that seat
is most likely to flip at the moment. Right, it's
the most Republican state with a Democratic open seat in
the governor's in all of the governor's races. So because
of that, I think you have to put Kansas in

(01:49:15):
the one spot, so number two last week. I had
it at number three last month.

Speaker 2 (01:49:19):
Excuse me.

Speaker 1 (01:49:20):
I had it at number three, I am putting it
at number two. I mean, the fact is, the Democrats
are in the tougher position in this three way race, right.
You know, if Dougan catches fire, it's at the expense
of the Democrats. If Dugan doesn't catch fire but still
gets low double digits, it's at the expense of the Democrat.

(01:49:40):
So there are not a ton of scenarios that give
in this case, that put the advantage in the in
the Democrats column here on this one. So I think
you have to put you know, if I've got Kansas
in the number one slot, I think you.

Speaker 2 (01:49:57):
Have to put Michigan.

Speaker 1 (01:49:57):
It's the second most likely state not to have a
Democratics the same party succeed the party the incumbent party
in this case, the Democrats. Look, I will continue to
say that I think the state of Michigan is the
single most important set of primaries. That Democratic primary in

(01:50:21):
the Senate campaign is going to be just you know,
just what direction does the party go in that Senate
race If you have a progressive like Abdul say Ed
who ends up not just the nominee, but wins that
Senate see it will be. It will help set the
tone of what the primary debate about Israel looks like

(01:50:41):
in the Democratic presidential primaries. The point is, boy, what
happens in Michigan, This three way governor's race and a
general election, that Democratic primary and Senate race. It's so
many If you're a serious political reporter and you want
to make a name for yourself, plant yourself in the
state of Michigan. Anyway, So Michigan in my number two slot. Look,

(01:51:03):
and then number three. Right now, I'm going to put
battleground state Georgia, And this is the new entry into
my top five list. And I'm the case I'm making
on why Georgia now is here is what happened in
the off off year elections. I think when you it's
the same reason why I dropped ASoft down the list
of Senate seats most likely to flip in our last

(01:51:26):
top five, and why I rise the Georgia governor's race.
I thought this would be a competitive race, but slight
advantage to the Republicans. But what happened in those Public
Service Commission races where Democrats won by double digits. And
if you've got a turnout and you've got a weak
Senate field. You've got a well funded incumbent candidate in

(01:51:49):
John Ossoff. You have a very competent potential gubernatorial nominee
in Kisha Lance Bottoms, and she is I think very
electable statewide, was not somebody that alienated the business community
as mayor of Atlanta. So you put this combination up there,

(01:52:11):
and suddenly I just feel a lot more bullish about
Democrats in general and their chances in Georgia right now
than I've had in a while, even more so than
the success the Democrats had in the twenty twenty campaign,
right sort of the most successful year that they've ever
had in Georgia in this century, where they carried the
presidency and won two sentence seats thanks to runoffs. By

(01:52:34):
the way, considering that we're going to have super competitive races,
in the likelihood there'll be some libertarian candidate on the ballot,
the likelihood we have runoff somewhere in Georgia in December
of twenty twenty six is probably higher than we any
of us want to contemplate at this moment. But just
put that in the back of your memory bank, that
that is coming. So Number one, Kansas, Number two, Michigan,

(01:52:56):
number three, Georgia in the four spot. I got to
put Wisconsin pretty much for the same reason why Michigan
is there, why Kansas is there. This is an open seat.
Wisconsin's been a bit of a windshield wiper, at least
in the twenty first century. Eight years one party, eight
years in the other, and here we go again for Democrats,

(01:53:17):
will the national wind blowing at their back allow them
to overcome what could be a state wind blowing in
their face? Well, didn't hurt Mikey Sheryl in New Jersey
right where the let you know, where you had an
outgoing governor that wasn't super popular. He wasn't super unpopular either,
but he was sort of middly if you will. He

(01:53:38):
certainly had a lower job rating than Glenn Younkin had
in Virginia. And so, you know, you just just due
to the swinging nature of Wisconsin, you had to put
that in the four slot and in the five slot.
I'm going to keep the same And it's simply because
Democrats have their candidate and Republicans don't yet, because there's

(01:53:59):
going to be a competitive primary and that's Iowa and
you have the Democratic cana Rob saying you just got
to know Josh Turreck a little bit. It does appear
as if the sort of populist, sort of more culturally
conservative but economic populist wing of the Democratic Party is

(01:54:20):
flexing its muscle in Iowa. If that is what if
you see that sort of if that is that the
unofficial ticket that is leading statewide in Iowa, that puts
them in a strong position. And I happen to believe
Iowa is a lot more winnable for Democrats than Ohio is,

(01:54:41):
even though I suspect the Ohio governor's race to be
quite close. We're still waiting for Tim Ryan to make
a decision on that one. I'm not ready to put
Ohio in any top five list on that front, but
I am with Iowa. So to recap my top five
for this month, the five evenor's mansions most likely to

(01:55:01):
flip Kansas one, Michigan two, Georgia three, Wisconsin four, Iowa five.
And I think when you look at that, it's three Democratic,
it's three Republican held seats, two Democratic health seats. No
excuse me, three Democratic health seats, two Republican health seats.

(01:55:27):
I think it's because you've seen Democrats had some good
success in twenty eighteen, winning in some light red states
now and in the swing states they're about to give that.
You know, now those folks are term limited and the
party is lucking out that it's likely they'll have the
win that they're back. So one would assume they hold

(01:55:48):
at least two of those three important Midwestern in states
that they want to hold Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, and Michigan. By
the way, in case you're wondering the following races I
contemplated for the top five lists I told you about Arizona.
I think Katie Obbs is the most vulnerable incumbent in
the country, but again I have my caveats there. The

(01:56:09):
hardest thing to do in politics, other than outstay sitting
one term president, is to outstay sitting one term governor.
Other seats that I are in my competitive category that
I did contemplate for this top five main an open
seat there Nevada. Joe Lombardo the sitting you know, he

(01:56:30):
just won. You know, this is a swingy state. We'll see.
I think I think Lombardo's in pretty good shape for reelection,
but it's going to be tight, and he certainly is
running a bit against a we think it's going to
be a breeze against him Ohio and the open seat
in Alaska. But until we find out the full field
in Alaska, what does Mary Patello do before, I'm willing

(01:56:52):
to put Alaska truly in the very, very competitive column.
So there you go my top five list this week.
Ask Chuck, all right, little last Chuck, I apologize for
not doing any ass check last week, or excuse me
last episode. I was, as many of you know, I've

(01:57:15):
been traveling a lot, so I was a fit behind
on the question front, and I want to ask a bunch.
I promise you next week I'm gonna have a heavy
dose of questions so that I can get to as
many of them as you've been sending in over the
last few weeks.

Speaker 2 (01:57:28):
And we have a ton of terrific questions.

Speaker 1 (01:57:30):
So this one comes from Amy from I'm gonna see
if I get this right. Amy is writing from Sheppichett,
Rhode Island. It's spelled cch p a c cht. I'm
assuming a soft cee on that SHEPPI set. Maybe it's chepichet.
Somebody will tell me. And Amy writes, dear Chuck, if

(01:57:50):
and when the Epstein file's a release, can we really
trust they're complete and untouched?

Speaker 2 (01:57:54):
Probably not.

Speaker 1 (01:57:56):
They've been floating around for years, and we've been told
many eyes, every few of them recently appreciate podcast will
trust you and olwys learn something new.

Speaker 2 (01:58:02):
Look.

Speaker 1 (01:58:02):
I think, unfortunately the way this situation has been handled,
I think there's going to be a lot of questions
about what we see and in fact we are. You know,
in some ways, the Epstein files have entered the Oswald
files territory right with JFK. The government's withheld those files
for so long that what they do release you assume
you can't trust what you've seen. So this is a

(01:58:24):
case where an untrustworthy institution is releasing files that you've
been skeptical of anyway. So I understand the skepticism on this. Look,
I suspect that we're not going to see these files
for a while. I suspect that you're going to see
an amendment in the you know, let's see what the

(01:58:44):
Senate does. Do they add any caveats to it, or
do they vote on it untouched. There's been a little
bit of back and forth on that, but I think
the most likely result is there's an open investigation that
Pambondi just opened on Democrats connected to Epstein, and that
that will service the pretext for not releasing anything at

(01:59:06):
least in the immediate future. Maybe we get them on
January nineteenth, twenty twenty nine.

Speaker 2 (01:59:12):
Just something to think about.

Speaker 1 (01:59:14):
But yes, I'm very skeptical that we're still going to
see it, but we'll say Thomas in Montana, right, Chuck,
Thanks for what you do. I don't always agree, but
I always walk away more informed. I even subscribe to
a new local weekly paper. Right on, quick question, are
you aware of the football game this week in Missoula, Montana?
It's kat Griz. I'm aware of the rivalry aka the
Brawl of the Wild, A fierce rivalry game with big

(01:59:36):
states and bigger emotions. One team might win fifty to ten,
but nobody knows which. It's one of the most captivating
events in college sports. Thomas and Montana, you are right,
this is one of I am. I've spent a lion's
share of my first college football season away from NBC,
mostly focused on my University of Miami Hurricanes, but within

(01:59:58):
the next couple of years I play aim to embark
on what I call a rivalry tour if you will missus.
Todd is a huge college football fan as well. We've
talked about this. We want to go to Michigan, Ohio State.
I want to go to Iowa State, Iowa. She's been
to Iowa State IOA.

Speaker 2 (02:00:14):
I have not.

Speaker 1 (02:00:16):
She's been a noted name USC I have not. I'd
like to go to Montana Montana State. First of all,
it's a great excuse to get up to Montana, and
that is a great one. I want to go to
an Auburn Alabama game, so I am well aware of that.
One one of my longtime sources that I've dealt with

(02:00:37):
over the years off and on is a former Obama
campaign hand named Jim Messina. He's a Montana native. There's
nothing like getting him to talk about this rivalry. So
one of I will confess. One of the great currencies
I've used as a reporter over the years is college football.
It is It is a it is a common language

(02:00:57):
that I've used to you know, to get to know
sources that you need to report on politics and good
political uh, good political strategists, good political candidates, whether they
like college football or not, know how to talk about
college football rivalries anyway, Uh, thank you for that reminder.

(02:01:22):
And let's just say that's that's going to be one
we all need to pay attention to regardless. Yes it's
an FCS, but I'll tell you if they had, you know,
one of those one of those Montana schools are going
to be Both of them have the passionate fan base
that that you know, they could make a pretty good

(02:01:43):
FBS team. You know, it does feel like those plain
states between the Dakotas and Montana, there's some really good
FCS football up there. When they play any teams in
the division above, they can sometimes give some scare so
I'm well aware it's very much quality football.

Speaker 2 (02:02:00):
All right.

Speaker 1 (02:02:00):
Next question comes from Lee Heck. Ooh, I think I
know Lee. I know Lee Heck in Seattle.

Speaker 2 (02:02:05):
Hey Lee, this is.

Speaker 1 (02:02:08):
An old friend. Anyway, Hey check love the election live
stream and now I have a soft spot for the
newsgirls good as you should their terrific subscribe to their podcast.
I'm wondering if your viewing California's registring voters shifted after
Tuesday give them the growing national momentum. Well, I still
favorite independent commissions. I understand the strategy to office at
GOP controlled stage. Also, it's a lifelong Hoosier. It's been
thrilling to see how you football finally shine. Now we

(02:02:28):
just need basketball to catch up. Yeah, I know, I
feel sorry for the basketball coach right now in Indiana.
Right now, there's so much more pressure to perform. If
the football team can do it, then why the hell
can't hoo's your basketball get there? Get their crap together?
Look as look, Hey, you should check out the column
I wrote this week on Substack, which is all about

(02:02:50):
Gavin Newsom and the vacuum he has filled for I
think a lot of people who have felt frustrated that
the Democrats don't know how to fight back with Trump.
Uh it's I am. I am not gonna I'm not
going to be one over that. This is a good idea.
I think making fewer congressional seats competitive is bad for

(02:03:13):
American politics, And that is the ultimate what is the
what is the consequence of all this? We now have
fewer competitive seats.

Speaker 2 (02:03:20):
That's bad.

Speaker 1 (02:03:22):
That means there are fewer races in America that are
sort of you know that the people haveing it can
have an impact on right There are fewer that are
deciding the balance of power. That's not healthy. But I
understand the h I understand the tactic, and it's been

(02:03:46):
a very successful CounterPunch to the point, you know, I'm
I am. I am relieved to know that there are
courts that think we shouldn't be doing this willy nilly
re redistricting every two years. So kudos to the to
the court in Texas to putting a pause on what's
happening there. And it could mean that that a court

(02:04:08):
challenge to California is re redistricting could have an impact here.
But what I will say is I do think it
is certainly fired up Democrats and it has really.

Speaker 2 (02:04:21):
Been good for Gavin Newsom. Uh.

Speaker 1 (02:04:24):
And one thing that I that is crystal clear to
me is that there is an appetite in the base
of the Democratic Party for a fighter at this moment
to fight back, to figure out if you have power,
do you know how to use it when they're trying
to wedge you with the power that they have. And
I think what you saw in Davenusom was an ability

(02:04:45):
to figure out how to use power when when he
felt is necessary. You're gonna have a hard time convincing
me this is good governance. I accept the premise we
are necessarily in a good governance moment, and I do
think the unintended consequence is less competition, which is bad
for everybody. I can't sit here and say it has

(02:05:06):
not been tactically successful for Democrats. Michael T from Chicago,
always a preacher, you're inside. I'm curious what you think
about Fox. Ititis this idea that about thirty percent of
the country fully believes the misinformation Fox spreads. My retired
father now watches it from morning tonight and it's convinced
Trump and Magar are the solution everything. My siblings and
I tread family gatherings because all he wants to do

(02:05:26):
is educate us with Fox talking points. How can we
save our democracy when so many people are trapped in
this misinformation bubble?

Speaker 2 (02:05:33):
Michael T.

Speaker 1 (02:05:35):
Look, it's unfortunately we know this disease, and I by
the way it exists with those that just sit in
front of MSNBC or ms NOW and watch it ten
hours a day. You know what's unhealthy watching one stream
of anything for eight to ten hours a day, and

(02:05:56):
for many retirees, many older folks. I do think that
Fox and ms and even seeing end to a lesser extent,
are sort of their background comfort, right, they're sort of
you know, if you're living alone, they provide some noise
so it doesn't feel so lonely. And yes, it has

(02:06:19):
I think it has a corrosive Uh, it can have
a corrosive effect, especially you know, over over time. And
you know, I can tell you I've got relatives who watch,
I might argue, watch too much of MS, and they
are convinced that literally this the Republic is going to
fall within days, just like there are folks that I

(02:06:42):
discover who watch so much Fox that are convinced that
there is some sort of communist conspiracy that is taken
over the Democratic Party. Can I make you feel better
that the average age of a viewer of any cable
news is now seventy plus, that this is an aging
demographic that is listening to this. I would argue that

(02:07:05):
it is no more influential than talk radio was thirty
years ago. On those that just allowed Rush Limbaugh to
sort of program their brains for three hours a day
as they were you know, doing you know, driving around
with sales or marketing and things like that, for the
for the for the for the traveling sales, the sales

(02:07:27):
force that was out there, or those that make it
made a living driving So I I I think you
might have asked that a generation before would have talked
about talk radio and you know, hey, you know, I've
got a father who listens to too much talk radio
and he seems to believe everything that comes out of

(02:07:48):
Rush Limbaugh.

Speaker 2 (02:07:49):
Right, So.

Speaker 1 (02:07:52):
It is I think the real danger is are the
lack of you know, the way the algorithms work, that
the algorithms don't allow us to versify our news streams
don't allow it. It is really difficult to diversify your
new stream.

Speaker 2 (02:08:06):
I have an unusual.

Speaker 1 (02:08:08):
Feed, right, but I have intentionally created a feed that
is as as you know, as sort of whiplashy as
you can get, because I'm trying to keep track of
the crazy MAGA, right, I'm trying to keep track of
the democratic socialist left, including the crazy version of the
democratic socialist left as well as you know. I think

(02:08:30):
there are mainstream MEGA and I think there's crazy MEGA.
I think there's mainstream democratic socialism. I think there's crazy
democratic socialists. So I'm trying to understand that if the
full spectrum that's out there. But you have to intentionally
do it as a feed and it is it is
more and more difficult because some people have simply left
acts because they've because it's clear that Elon Musk is

(02:08:53):
sort of screwed with the algorithms to sort of suppress
one side of the aisle. Any sort of ample fives
the other side of the aisle, which also can be screwy.

Speaker 2 (02:09:03):
With your feet.

Speaker 1 (02:09:05):
But I think the thing that is most dangerous is
this is the is the algorithmic driven bubbles.

Speaker 2 (02:09:11):
Right.

Speaker 1 (02:09:12):
Cable has fallen prey to this, But this is just
as much of a problem on TikTok with young people
and only getting one you know, a source, you know,
one sided source there. I mean, this is I wish
this were an isolated issue just with fox iyness. But
I guess my point is that that we we sort
of we're almost a tapestry of these bubbles, and I

(02:09:35):
think they've all been pretty destructive on the information ecosystem.
That's the core issue, right, The information ecosystem currently has
an incentive structure that is that pushes us away from
quality information and pushes us towards amplification and affirmation. All right,

(02:10:00):
next question comes from Joshua Beeh and he simply writes,
does Amy Acting or Tim Ryan give give Democrats the
best shot? Does Amy Actin or Tim Ryan give Democrats
the best shot at winning the twenty twenty six Ohio
Governor's race. You know it's interesting. I'm I know both
of these Democrats pretty well. I know Vivick Ramaswami somewhat

(02:10:20):
well as two And in fact, this is one of
those races where I think I've hosted all three of
them at various times as podcast guests and various iterations.
I find them all to be interesting conversationalists. I learned
something from all three of them. This is I could
make a case this could be the smartest set of

(02:10:43):
candidates for governor that you could have. You know, I'm
not I don't want to make a moral or ethical
judgment about about that. I have a feeling you may
have some strong feelings about ramas Swami. But I'll tell
you this, I think Ramaswamy's weak potential Republican nominee. I
think connection with Doge is a net negative.

Speaker 2 (02:11:08):
I think.

Speaker 1 (02:11:11):
That it's you know, Amy Acting being Mike Dewin's former
health advisor.

Speaker 2 (02:11:17):
Is that a help? Now?

Speaker 1 (02:11:18):
I'm I think there's such a negative view of COVID
that even though I think Amy acting frankly would be
a fascinating governor, I don't know if leaning into COVID

(02:11:40):
or having that be your origin story on the political
map is a net positive, right. I just think people
are so they don't want to think about COVID, and
so I don't know if that just costs her a
couple of you know, makes her a weaker candidate. But
Tim Ryan feels like a serial candidate for office, right,
How much does he really want to be governor? He
just ran for Senate and lost. Is he just looking

(02:12:02):
for is this a stepping stone?

Speaker 2 (02:12:04):
Right?

Speaker 1 (02:12:05):
He thought about running for president in twenty twenty almost
did it right, you know? Or is he really serious
about being governor? And why hasn't he gotten in yet?

Speaker 2 (02:12:12):
Right?

Speaker 1 (02:12:15):
And he's gotten in bed with the crypto world, which
I don't know whether that's a net positive because it
neutralizes the issue and they won't all come in for Ramaswami,
or it neutralizes it in a way that's a net
negative for Ryan. If you are a cryptoskeptic or you're
worried about sort of how silicon Valley has there has

(02:12:37):
entrenched themselves in the campaign. So I could make a
case that either one of the I guess on paper,
I think Tim Ryan's probably the slightly stronger profile, and
it's simply due to COVID fatigue and the fact that
the electorate just and that doctor Actin could just be

(02:13:01):
could be a reminder of something that many voters just
want to compartmentalize and not talk about. But here's what
I do believe. I think Ramaswami's the among the weaker
candidates they could get for governor. I think this is
a more winnable race than Democrats have treated it. I think, Ohio,
I say this, it's light red, not dark red. And

(02:13:23):
if there was ever a if there, now you know,
I really think would have been the strongest candidate for
governor wouldn't have been either Amy Actor or Tim Ryan.
It'd been Shared Brown. Just something to think about, all right,
last question and then I and then we'll call it.

Speaker 2 (02:13:40):
We'll call it a podcast.

Speaker 1 (02:13:42):
This comes from Jacob. He says, Hey, check loving the
new podcast. It actually reminds me of Peter King's Monday
Morning Quarterback. I'll take that as high praise. I like
that podcast, and Peter King's a friend. I like Peter,
especially how your football segment's had a personal engaging touch.
I wanted to suggest a Netflix style docu series on
conspiracy theories. Oh buddy, I have I have a treatment
already written on this stuff. But this is great, Jacob.

(02:14:03):
Can I get you to get a job in Netflix
so they could greenlight this series? But anyway, you've already
touched on the Nixon tapes, JFK, and Jonestown, and with
the rise in UFO sightings and current conspiracies, there's plenty
to explore. A short three episode series could really work.
Keep up the great work, looking forward to more. Look,
I think it's a great idea. And here's why. I
think conspiracy theories actually are a terrific sort of way

(02:14:25):
to engage the public in learning how to critically think.
There is a Florida State University a couple of years
ago started a class that was essentially about news literacy,
but instead of calling it about news literacy, they called
it introduction to conspiracy theory. And the point being is

(02:14:46):
that and I could do this. I could make a
forty seven forty seven part series on presidential conspiracy theories.
Because every single president has had some conspiracy theory dog them,
and learning how that conspiracy theory got traction helps you

(02:15:07):
understand the media ecosystem right of that era, whether it's
about Warren Harding and Teapot Dome, whether it's about James
Garfield and Roscoe Conkling, or whether it's about JFK or
whether it's about Nixon or or or the Trilateral Commission. Right,

(02:15:27):
we can and George W. George H. W. Bush Whitewater
and Vince Foster and Bill Clinton. But when you when
explaining every presidential conspiracy theory, it's actually a terrific way
to get people to understand sort of when you understand
how a conspiracy theory takes takes hold, then it just

(02:15:51):
helps you be a better critical thinker when it comes
to consuming news and information period. So, uh, by the
way you entertain people at the same time, that's the
sweet spot. And I'm a huge look. I believe at
the end of the day, what we're really doing if

(02:16:11):
my podcast is success or failure based on whether I'm educating,
and if I'm educating, I think I'm doing something successful.
If I'm not educating you and making you smarter and
making you understand something better than I'm not doing my job.
And I think in some ways, the best way to
educate people about news consumption, the best way to educate

(02:16:31):
people sometimes about American history is to make the entry
point something shocking and tabloid, like a conspiracy theory, and
you suck them in with that, and then you accidentally
teach them about American and oh, they're accidentally better informed.
So love where you're headed, love where you're thinking, and hey, Netflix,

(02:16:54):
if you're listening, we could be doing a lot more
of these, you know, instead of doing cliff notes of
history like you did with Death by Lightning, where you's
sort of I find myself ultimately disappointed in this garf
and Death by Lightning because yes, there's so much they
could have done better, and there's so much more of

(02:17:15):
the era that they could have you know. It literally
is like a tasting menu, like having a taste of
what could be an incredible meal. If Netflix would have
let Benioffen Whites do what would have made an incredible
meal an eight or a ten part docus series on

(02:17:37):
sort of the rise and follow Carfield anyway with that,
with that programming lineup, getting ready to be prepared in
the back of my brain. I'll see in twenty four hours,
ten minutes, okay,

All Episodes

Full Episode - Trump’s Coalition Is Starting To Crack + Why Democrats Struggle…And Can Still Win In Iowa

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang

Crime Junkie

Stuff You Should Know

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}Full Episode - Trump’s Coalition Is Starting To Crack + Why Democrats Struggle…And Can Still Win In Iowa