And, This is Jordan Klepper

Co-Host and Contributor of The Daily Show, Jordan Klepper, joins the podcast to discuss being a MAGA rockstar, how he learned about the Late Show’s cancellation, and whether California’s redistricting is enough to stand up to Donald Trump. 

IG: @ThisisGavinNewsom
Email: [e-mail]
Substack: Gavinnewsom
Phone: 855-6NEWSOM

See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Episode Transcript

Speaker 1 (00:08):
This is Gavin Newsom and this is the Daily Shows.
Jordan Klepper. Jordan, welcome, Thank you for being on the podcast.

Speaker 2 (00:22):
Thanks for having me.

Speaker 1 (00:23):
Jesus. So what I mean we were you know, we
were just commenting full disclosure right before you came on
the air. Just a lot of stress, a lot of anxiety,
a lot of you know, people feeling the more pessimistic.
We talk about doom scrolling, but just this notion like
feeling like things are way out of control, particularly this week.

(00:43):
So many contemporary things to talk about, and then I
want to talk about your career and all the extraordinary
things you're doing, but we'd be remiss if not talking
about this week in the United States, what's going on
in Texas and redistricting, what's happening in states like California, Illinois,
New York as it relates to that is subject, but
particularly on the issue that really struck a chord with

(01:03):
a lot of folks, and that's on stats, on labor, stats,
on this notion that we can fire the messenger, the
issue of truth and trust and feeling like America, as
Tom Freeman wrote today, is being deconstructed. I mean, where
are you as someone that you know is deeply ameshed

(01:23):
in the body politic and crosses over into points of
view that are not often shared, and you have a
deeper understanding of the world we're living in. Where are
you in terms of this you know moment we're living in.
Are you pessimistic or more optimist?

Speaker 2 (01:40):
Well, I mean I'm looking for a big enough rock
to hide under. More often than not, it's hard to
get caught up in the news cycle. And when I
go out there and talk to people as well, not
only on the road and talk to people of different
political stripes, but I do a lot of stand up
and I do a lot of talking with an audience, and.

Speaker 3 (01:58):
People are scared, and I get that you are not wrong.

Speaker 2 (02:01):
It is infuriating to turn on the news and hear
that suddenly, you know, reporting the stats and numbers can
get you fired. It's not a terrible surprise, I will
tell you what. I'm out in the field and talking
with a lot of MAGA supporters, and numbers come out.
Everybody sort of has their own statistician at that point,
everybody has their own guide they can reference. And in

(02:24):
so many ways, I think this Trump administration feels like
a reflection of the Internet itself. And this might be
the ludite in me, but it's so easy for us
now to go search out the facts that make us
feel comfortable and reinforce the worldview that we have. And
the conversations I have with people on theline, which is
the worst place to have conversations with people, are often
footnoted with websites and numbers and data that don't check out,

(02:49):
because that's what you do. Now you have a conversation,
you find the thing to make you right. And I'd
like to have hope in the higher levels that those
conversations are based on fact I don't have a lot
of that help. And so seeing the firing that took
place this week is infuriating. It scares a lot of
people in my orbit, but it's not surprising. It feels

(03:10):
like an extension of the Internet.

Speaker 1 (03:12):
So what I mean, what do you do in that instance?
I mean, it's interesting when you say it's not surprising.
So often I hear that, and that's infuriating as well,
because then it's almost a permission slip that it's sort
of acceptable because the normal we've allowed a normalization of deviancy,
and so nothing then becomes surprising, and then it becomes
we're sort of complicit in it all of a sudden
sort of manifests uh. And I think that's the great

(03:33):
struggle that we're all having, is that we're seeing American reverse.
We're seeing you know, we're seeing truth and trust, We're
seeing historical facts being rewritten. We're seeing the sort of
cultural purge happening, the shock and awe overwhelming us. Uh,
and the zig and the zag that is the distractions
day in and day out. So how do you I mean,
it's I love that you say, sort of manifestation of

(03:55):
what's online is becoming offline with Trump. How do you
start to navigate that? I mean, is that the work
you're doing to sort of distill the essence of that
in using comedy as an entry way to have that conversation,
or what is your diagnosis beyond that in terms of
what you do to address it?

Speaker 2 (04:15):
Well, I think we're all living under the fire hose
of information and news and chaos, and some of that
can be argued as strategy from a Trump administration, some
I think as an extension of a mindset I do
think as reclient made an interesting point recently that was
I think a lot of people give the Trump administration
credit for their diversions and their tangents, and I think

(04:37):
there's credence in something like that. But I think also
it's a manifestation of a mindset that he has that
is constantly distracted. And he's been given the ability to
be distracted and to lose interest in Elon Musk and
to jump into something else. And so again it feels
like we're living in a world that is a manifestation
of his mindset, an internet mindset, a selfish mindset, and

(05:01):
there is this fire who's.

Speaker 3 (05:02):
Fire hose of news that.

Speaker 2 (05:04):
Is politically advantageous when you want to get your own
things across that might not be popular from a comedic standpoint,
when we show up at work and we have this
fire hose, like, our job is not to solve it.
Our job is to find the chaos, see where the
bullshit is, try to make some sense of it and
some humor of it. I think, at its at its
clearest and best, satire can boil down a feeling and

(05:26):
a moment into something that's digestible and fast.

Speaker 3 (05:29):
And so for us we try to.

Speaker 2 (05:31):
Wave wade through the fire host find what is important
and also find what we can stick our pov onto
with something that hopefully is funny and connects. But it's
a constant conversation that we're having day in and day
out as to like, how do you deal with this?
And what what is a distraction? Again, we are legislating.

(05:52):
Our job is not to fix the solution. Our job
is as a media satire to look at it and
find the humor within it. But we are constantly having
to make game time calls as to like, are we
covering what happened in the Oval office? Are we covering
what's happening with these ice raids? Where does humors have
a place, where is it best utilized? And how do

(06:15):
we make that work for us at our audience.

Speaker 1 (06:17):
It's interesting you say that because you know it's interesting
with the Daily Show generally, and you know John Stewart
had sort of peak and I remember being ready, and
I honestly I'm not. I think I told John this
when we sat down we did something on the death
penalty a few years ago, and I think I told him,
I said, I'm really pissed at you. You walked away
from your show with peak influence where folks were tuning

(06:39):
in and particularly young folks, but people like me that
were washing and everything going on in cable that wanted
you to distill the essence using the lens of comedy,
but also sort of guide us in a deeper understanding,
distill through that wit and witticism and satire where we
are and where we need to go. And I remember
he retired right when at the beginning of that election, like, no,

(07:02):
you don't get to go John, that you don't. You
have a responsibility. So I'm interested. You know people, I
think you know, particularly you Jordan. We're going to get
to you specifically. I mean your your improvisational skills, your
capacity and and sort of legendary capacity to go in
and to show empathy and compassion humanity to people you

(07:25):
disagree with, to go to these Trump rallies, to meet
with people they still feel comfort level to you. That
attracts folks that are looking for guidance, looking for direction.
And I wonder, you know, in a world where you
just you're watching the cable networks and it's just a
lot of noise, don't you feel And I'm curious if
you do, But do you feel that comedy and the

(07:48):
work you're doing actually is now more important uh in
terms of providing the way uh and and not just
distilling a moment of understanding, but also providing a light
in some direction.

Speaker 2 (08:03):
I mean that's well as a as a person in
the entertainment industry and an actor, I do have a
sense of self importance that does make me think, Yes,
I'm more and more important every single day. Cover reduce
him every single day. I'm more important to the general
politic of it all. Yes, I mean, I will say,
like going back to when I connected to The Daily Show,

(08:28):
I used to watch it in college. I wasn't interested
in politics. I wasn't connected, I wasn't locked in. Quite frankly,
I don't know how college students do it today. Like
I had the luxury of being naive about the world
around me and just focusing on improv comedy and drinking
a forty ounce and not throwing up like that was
like my journey as a twenty one year old. And

(08:50):
now a twenty one year old has to be so
connected to the world around them. But I watched John
on The Daily Show, and this guy was able to
distill ideas quickly. He wasn't the end of information, but
he was a conduit to learning more about something, and
I trusted him. I didn't think he was bullshitting. I
think media has bias on it. Every media has biased

(09:11):
on it. I want every person who watches television to
understand what bias is there. It doesn't mean there's not
great people who are trying to tell you the truth
as they know it, but like there's bias in the
structures and the institutions and the places that tell us
the things that we have. I think what a lot
of people get out of the Daily Show. What I
got out of the Daily Show was like, I get
Jon Stewart.

Speaker 3 (09:30):
He's a comedian.

Speaker 2 (09:30):
He's trying to tell us something funny, and I think
bullshit is his barometer, and when he sees something that
doesn't sit right with him, he goes at it, and
so you knew his bias.

Speaker 3 (09:39):
I think a lot of people.

Speaker 2 (09:40):
When they watch our stuff, they watch my stuff, they
know my bias. I'm not an unbiased journalist trying to
go out there and get What I want to do
is find something funny, find hypocrisy, find irony.

Speaker 3 (09:52):
I care about things. I'm progressive in nature.

Speaker 2 (09:55):
And I do my research when I go out there
and I think people can connect to me in no
wa that about what I'm doing out in the field,
and quite frankly, when I'm doing the man on the
street stuff in the field, like I have the luxury
of not being a journalist in some ways pretending just
to be unbiased in their conversations, I can have a
goal and a hypocrisy that I'm trying to put forward.

(10:18):
I can be relentless in the ways in which I
go after somebody to try to find that hypocrisy there,
and hopefully I can be also empathetic within that that
that not only gets me something revealing about somebody, but
also has some sort of connection. So for me, that's
sort of how I see the work that we do there.
And you know, the level of import I think that

(10:39):
will be on an audience to decide. But where I
always get from the satirist that I love, quite frankly,
John Stewart, Stephen Colbert, like the people I grew up with,
the people I get to work with like, is that
you understand they're biased, you understand their tenacity, and because
of that they can cut to the quick and my

(10:59):
faith quote about humor George Saunders, the author says like
humor is what happens when we're told the truth more
swiftly and quickly than we're accustomed to. And I think
like at it best, like in those moments where you
have a fire hose of trump bs, like that quick
crystallized joke or revelation, like can articulate through the through the.

Speaker 1 (11:24):
Chaos, love it? Were you, by the way you look
at Robin Williams, George Carlin, I may were there folks
in the political frame that you I mean particularly, I
mean you mentioned obviously Colbert and will get to that
in a moment, and John himself obviously. But when you
were growing up, when you were that twenty one year
old hanging out in college, it wasn't that. Were you
attracted to political comedy? Were you pacted to that sort

(11:47):
of wit and witticism, that capacity to distill the essence
of a moment I loved?

Speaker 2 (11:52):
In college, I found Muddy Python, which was political in
a different sense, I think, absurdist political comedy, and that
drew me to the Second City in Chicago, which was
political and social satire. And so once I jumped into
the world of like the Second City comedy, I learned
about like Nichols and May who were doing such great
political satire in the fifties, and then Stephen Colbert, Steve Carell,

(12:15):
Tina Fey, the people at Second City, Like even if
they were overtly political at the time, like the stuff,
the work they were doing in Chicago, that they would
eventually go on and do it SNL in other places
like was all very much commentary on the world around them,
even if that's just social dynamics. Extending that into political
stuff like that to me was like, oh, the the

(12:37):
real marrow of this comedy thing is like use these
tools of absurdism and wit but go at like articulating
these these cultural trends. And so that was sort of
always my world. And then John comes in and Colbert
comes in, and I can see like them articulating a
worldview and speaking to what people were talking about. And

(12:58):
so I became more more a political comedian as I
became older, and those people also started to flourish in
ways that they hadn't when I was coming up.

Speaker 1 (13:08):
What is I mean obviously would would be remissive speaking
of coming up, we didn't bring up the Cobert issue.
I mean that that kind of took people. I mean,
it took me by complete surprise, also pissed me off.
I think it pissed a lot of people off. And
back to sort of how we started this, I mean,
it was alarming beyond words. I mean, because back to

(13:29):
truth and trust. I mean, is are they letting this
guy go and eliminating this show because it costs too much?
Or is it about something else? And I know it
puts you in a tough spot, so mindful of that. Man,
I don't mean to put you on the spot just
to Comedy Central, et cetera. But I mean, how did
I'm curious, what when you first heard that news? Where
were you? How did you take it? And what went

(13:49):
through your mind? What was sort of the initial reaction
I was.

Speaker 2 (13:53):
I was. I was hosting the Daily Show that week,
and we had a we had a big week, and
we had a great week of shows. And as I
walked off on our last show on Thursday, I got
the news that the Colbert was Show was ending. And
I have a lot of friends who work over there,
and Steven is a family member of the Daily Show.
You know, he's he lives in Lore over there and

(14:16):
was a Daily Show member for so long, and so
we love Steven and yeah, immediately it's a gut punch.
I think like his voice I think is important right
now at a time where it feels like a lot
of people are stepping down when they could be stepping up.
Stephen Colbert is somebody who's stepping up, and to see
an organization push back on that is alarming. I know

(14:38):
there are economic things that play here, I think where
I get frustrated beyond just not being able to see
Steven Colbert, and quite frankly, I think Stephen Colbert is
going to find ways to be part of the conversation.
So I think he's going to be He's going to
be around. I know that for sure. I think there
became such a conversation around the economics of Late Night

(14:58):
and the end of Late and I think you can
make arguments about like whether or not the advertising structure
on linear television works at eleven and thirty slot. Okay,
have that business conversation, but I think the effect of
Late Night of a John Stewart, of a Stephen Colbert,
of a Jimmy Kimmel, like people are interacting with this
content and this information more than they ever have before.

(15:21):
I know, with the daily Show, our reach online and
all the different spaces. I do stuff at the desk,
I do stuff at the field, I do specials that
go out across the globe. They're part of the conversation.
You have the President of the United States who's pissed
at the things that are being said on late night. Like,
to me, that is not a reflection of an industry
that has no connection. In fact, to feel like a

(15:43):
reflection of an industry that is part of the larger conversation.
And quite frankly, like a couple of days later, Steven's
first show back like John Colbert. John went on Colbert,
so did Oliver, Seth Myers, Jimmy Fallon. What gave me
a sense of pride in this this space where we

(16:05):
are seeing institutions and people who have a microphone, we're
seeing them.

Speaker 3 (16:09):
Take a step back.

Speaker 2 (16:10):
I was really proud to see these comedians who are
in different networks, different places and have different priorities like
coming together and standing behind Stephen, speaking truth to power
and supporting a guy that they think should have a voice,
wherever that may be. And so that that to me
was like a little sense of pride. And also I
really wish they asked me to be a part of that,
it would be it would have been nice.

Speaker 3 (16:32):
I'm in town.

Speaker 2 (16:34):
It could have written a small part like I you know,
there's there's an it could have been slightly better. But
for the most part, I I it made me feel
a sense of pride for like the late night comedians
who are who are not going quietly into the night.

Speaker 1 (16:52):
It's interesting just you know, sort of breaking down the
reach that it punches way above its weight outside that
time slot, and how and all of these mediums and
all this capacity to communicate and obviously that's you know,
a big part of what you've been doing. And you're
not just doing the correspondent work. You're not just hosting
on nights the Daily Show, but you obviously branched out
as well. You do these deeper sort of specials, but

(17:14):
you're also doing a bunch of podcasts as well. Is
this I mean at the end of the day, is
I mean? No, it seems to me even seen it
on MSNBC. Everybody it's on MSNBC seems to have a podcast.
Sean Hannity's always had his radio shows for years and
years and years. I mean, the multifacet nature, No longer
linear as you say, what what's what's that landscape look

(17:37):
like today and what do you sort of where do
you anticipate that going.

Speaker 3 (17:40):
I mean it's wild.

Speaker 2 (17:42):
I mean you're the governor of a state right now
and you're we're talking on your podcast.

Speaker 1 (17:47):
Yeah enough a late night you know hosts that otherwise
it would have to go on your damn show to
have a conversation five. I mean everything about.

Speaker 2 (17:59):
It, right this is this, This landscape is so strange.
You're like, oh, I guess I also have to have
a podcast. This is yeah, this is wow. I do
think from like an entertainment standpoint, you have to be
able to connect to people where they are, and so
like late night is a great space for that. You know.
What I'm proud of with the Daily Show is like

(18:19):
we have evolved and we've always been able to like
I can go into the field and doing those pieces
connect with people in a different way, and there's a
curiosity with people in their heads about like what do
actually people think out in the middle of America. And
a lot of this content is made on the coasts.
And so for me to be able to go to
you know, Florida, to Pennsylvania, wherever and talk to somebody

(18:41):
is compelling in a way that isn't seen on other
other venues.

Speaker 3 (18:45):
And then you have podcasts, and then you have.

Speaker 2 (18:47):
Other spaces that that really are the way people are
starting to get their information and have these conversations. So
it is important for comedians, for politicians to meet people
where they are to expand with those kind of conversations.
Arm Quite frankly, what I like about the podcast medium
is that it is it's elongated. I'm everything else is shortening,

(19:09):
and the attention span is shortening, and the context shortens,
and that's where I get worried in the comedy space,
I'm sure as well in the political space, like once
you shorten everything to just that clip, you lose the context,
You lose the ability to have any kind of depth
of conversation or awareness of an issue that has more
than than one easy digestible side. And in a format

(19:31):
like a podcast, at least i'm i'm, i'm, i'm. I'm
happy to hear that people listen to things for an
hour or two hours and digest that and and wherever
that space exists, I think you have to kind of
go to that and have those conversations.

Speaker 1 (19:45):
You speaking of go to, I mean you and in
your go to has been I mean, your brand, it's
just next level. And I was, man, I realized, I
think I watched every damn clip before when I was
sort of anticipation of meeting with you for this.

Speaker 2 (19:59):
You've got shit to governor. You know, I'm aren't you
trying to Aren't you trying to double Jerrymander California? Right now?

Speaker 1 (20:05):
We're gonna get so we're gonna get to what we're doing.
In reaction too, I.

Speaker 2 (20:11):
Was gonna say, like, instead of my videos, you could
take more Republican votes away?

Speaker 3 (20:15):
Is that what's happening?

Speaker 1 (20:15):
What's going on about? Hey? We all have capacity to
do more and be more, and that's the spirit of
what you've done. You've read how many damn Trump rallies
have you been to? Have you counted?

Speaker 2 (20:28):
I've lost count it has been. I mean I started
doing in twenty fifteen.

Speaker 1 (20:33):
What was it? What was the and I We'll get
to the count in a second, But what was the
inspiration for that first Trump rally?

Speaker 2 (20:40):
Oh? I mean I can't it was. I mean I
think back in the time it was Can you believe it?

Speaker 3 (20:45):
A reality?

Speaker 2 (20:46):
Star is running for president. We should we should get
out there and talk to people before this goes away.

Speaker 1 (20:51):
Where it goes away.

Speaker 2 (20:53):
You know what was compelling that first rally, what stood
out to me, like the first which was very early
in Trump announcing his presidency, the conspiracy of the moment,
of the Trump moment was the Barack Obama birth certificate,
which which feels like forever ago, but at that time
in American history, to walk up with the camera and

(21:16):
a microphone and ask somebody if you think Barack Obama
was born in America, nine out of ten people would say,
of course he was born in America, even if they
didn't believe that Barack Obama was born in America culturally.
That's not only insensitive, it is racist. And you're not
going to say that in front of a camera, in

(21:36):
front of a microphone. It'd be acidine to think that
I would get somebody on camera saying no, Barack Obama
is a secret Muslim. Like that was the beginning, and
I remember talking to people about that and nobody would
mention that. A few months later, that number became at
a at a MAGA rally, it became six seven and
ten people were unafraid to call Barack Obama a secret musclm.

(21:59):
You could just I was like, oh my god, this
was months ago. This seemed like it was an impossibility.
Not that racism doesn't exist in America, but at least
that there was an understanding to hide your racism or
an understanding that like that was a that was an unpopular,
untoward opinion that maybe you hadn't vetted enough in your
mind to actually articulate in front of a stranger. And

(22:20):
yet the power of that man saying that over and
over and over again, it just moved that line in
such a dramatic and swift fashion that I that I've
seen happen over and over and over again to this day.

Speaker 1 (22:36):
So that was And I want to get to the
communication because it's interesting. I mean, use the frame over
and over and over and again, this notion of repetition
in terms of communication frame. But twenty fifteen sort of
launched that the Birther issue, which created a lot of
your content and what ninety hundred rallies later.

Speaker 2 (22:55):
Probably about that, Yeah, I think that's about ninety hundred. Yeah.

Speaker 1 (22:59):
I mean, what is what's been the through line for you?
What's been the most sort of, you know, as you
sort of reflect on the journey of all these interactions,
and anybody that hasn't taken the time to see these
clips you really should because you know, I use the
word empathy, your ability to engage people and create that
space of trust. And they may be embarrassed at the
end of the day, they may not even be embarrassed

(23:20):
because they're situationally unaware of the contradictions, which are fascinating.
And I don't know how much editing you do we
can get to that in a moment, or how many
things we don't see, of course, how many it tries,
the complete disasters and you just go with the one.
But it seems to me a lot of really good
people and it breaks my heart. I feel more empathetic

(23:42):
watching your interactions. Feel I feel really badly for people
that they've been so lied to, so misled, and they
feel they feel You can feel the emotion, the anger
of being contradicted or themselves contradicting themselves and when the
facts are presented and the facts that can't be because
my beliefs are so strong. Anyway, what has been your

(24:03):
sort of group? But what have you learned on this
over the course of least many many years, these rallies.

Speaker 2 (24:08):
Well, I think you are you are spot on in that,
you know when a lot of people, often from the left,
come up and ask about MAGA rallies, and many people
from that never went to a Trump rally, and I
highly recommend it. What I think is so enjoyable and
empathetic about those events is like they're like a parade
coming into town. And when I talk like, even if

(24:30):
you aren't on board, you go to the parade coming
into town, and for the most part, a giant group
of those folks are there because they want community and
they get it. They get it immediately, and they want meaning.
You have the most powerful person on the freaking planet
who's like this, you can be a patriot, you can
do this thing stand up. That is such a it's

(24:51):
such a it's an amazing promise to give to people.
And the desire to have meaning and community in your
life is such a universal desire. It's something that I'm
constantly searching for and I feel it there and I
like it. I yearned for it. I'm a Michigan football
fan and I go to the Big House and I
see the exact same thing happen like it's what we do.

(25:13):
We buy a hat. There's a reason you put on
a hat. I put on a Michigan hat. They put
on a Maga hat, that red hat. Because as soon
as you put that on, you feel like you're part
of this team. You see ten thousand other people who
share something in common with you, and that I see
and that I understand, and I yearn for more of
that in my own life. It's the manipulation of that
these people are vulnerable and open to this and the

(25:37):
lies and the bs that is fed to these folks.
I think when I have these conversations with people, more
often than not, I'm confronting them with information that is
new to them. They have to articulate their opinion that
they've shared with their friends over and over again. They
have to articulate why for the first time in real
time with me. And I think that's what you start

(25:59):
to realize. It's like, oh, they haven't stressed tested this idea.
And the old days, you'd have your friends at the
bar who don't believe what you believe, and you'd have
to tell them why you believe that wild thing? What
facts you have to prove the birtherism lie. But now
you're your six pals that you see, they're not going
to press you on it. The Internet that you're on
is gonna press you on it. The Fox News that

(26:20):
you're listening to is just reinforcing it. And so when
you go out into a field and you talk to
me and I ask you something like that, you assume
this has already been stress tested and perfect. You haven't
even thought thought through why you believe it so surely.
And then when this dumb lanking guy asks you, but
why over and over again, you start to see those

(26:40):
those cracks. And for me, that is what is most revelatory.
Is like you see you see the propaganda and how
it how it seeps its way into people. You see
how identity is something that forces people to cling on
to things even though they may see the cracks in
the logic. But you also see people haven't haven't thought

(27:02):
through the logistics of that, They've just trusted. And I
think that's such a loving, loving attribute for most people
to have this trust that this person who garnered so
much fame and attention for his entire career came here
and told me it was true. So why isn't it.
I think that's on the left. You can kind of forget.
It's like what happened on January six, like is crazy

(27:25):
and I was there. You were there, but I was there.
But when like the president tells you to do these things,
that person is so powerful and to believe in that person,
like you understand where that comes from. And it's so
infuriating that he has the power and the ability to
get those points across. But I think the humanity in
the MAGA supporters that I find is in just the
trust and the faith that this community that they've found

(27:50):
couldn't possibly be steered wrong by somebody who's accrued so
much power and success.

Speaker 1 (27:55):
What you know, And I want to go back to
January six, because I don't think people fully appreciate you
when you say you were there, you were.

Speaker 3 (28:03):
Work there, I was working governor working there.

Speaker 1 (28:08):
Recently. Pardon Jordan Klipper, Yes he is joining us today
on the podcast. Uh, yes, you were just there. It
was a peaceful rally.

Speaker 2 (28:18):
Peace it was it was just it was a traditional
tourist visit.

Speaker 1 (28:21):
It was Yeah. Let me ask you, though, did I
mean you must have I mean we saw the images
of your cameraman kind of getting tripped up, this sort
of intentional effort to become a victim the person that
that tripped him to say, oh he ran into me,
to sort of create these conditions through our welling in
nature of that. But what you must have there was

(28:42):
I imagine points where you started to realize that this
thing's getting real, that this is getting a little out
of control. We need to get the hell out of here.

Speaker 2 (28:52):
Yeah, it was, I mean, we were We had been
to the million Maga March a month before, which was
the Stop the Steal March. Yep uh. They said a
million that was their numbers, but there was forty thousand
people there perhaps, And it was tense. And there's been
a shift in like you know, as contentious as some
of the interviews I can I have can get for

(29:13):
the most part, people want to have a conversation. They
don't get testy. Post that Trump election loss, people were
testy and they're frustrated in the art, and they were argumentative.
And we had a few situations where security had to
step in. And so for January sixth, we sort of
knew people are going to be angry, and Trump had
been telling people be there will be wild. When you

(29:36):
show up, the mall is full of people wearing very
aggressive T shirts with guns on them, and when you
talk to people, there was nothing but talk about revolution
and what have you. So we were very strategic about
where we wanted to be, and we also quite literally
knew the game plan for the crowd was going to
be listen to the Trump speech and then move on

(29:56):
to the Capitol and stop the vote. So we positioned
ourselves to be there in the front when the boat
was taking place, and we watched Proud Boys march by
us and we saw everything happen. I think from our
own perspective it was it was intense. We didn't think
they would get inside. At some point, you're like, we
think this is coming, so I'm sure there's enough structures

(30:19):
in the way to stop this from from going as
far as some people would like it to be. And
when they broke down those first barriers, what was so
fascinating was like the mix. You had the Proud Boys
and the oath keepers, the people.

Speaker 3 (30:32):
Who were dressed for war.

Speaker 2 (30:33):
They were there, they were upfront, and they were they
pushed through and they were attacking. And then you also
had this second wave of MAGA supporters who've been pretending
to be dressed for war for years and dressed like
tourists in the Capitol, standing on top of barriers like

(30:54):
echoe movements from war movies to get people up there,
and like that day to me such it's it's sort
of like this Trump administration in general. Like it was
so heartbreaking and sad and absurd at the same time.
I'm interviewing a man on a segue going up trying
to overthrow the government, and also people with zip ties.
I interviewed people who I would later find out brought

(31:17):
weapons into the Capitol, and you just you there was
real danger and threat and ludicrous absurdity at the same time.
And flash bangs started going off, people started breaking inside,
and we had a security detail with us that was like,
it's time to go. We don't know what the situation is,
we can't control it, and we got out of there.
But it was it was it was heartbreaking and ridiculous

(31:40):
and and everything all in one and and in so
many ways predictable. I think that's part of what is
so got to start infuriating.

Speaker 1 (31:54):
Was it predictable to you that Trump would find his
way back? I mean at that moment, you must thought this,
this is over ever and now it's I mean he's toasted.

Speaker 2 (32:04):
Yeah, I mean it's this news cycle. You know, it
eats its own tail so quickly. But watching watching Republican
Congress folks stand up and talk about January sixth, the
day after talking Lindsay Graham articulate being done, like go
back and watch those I did recently, and it was like, wow,

(32:26):
this certainty, the bipartisan nature of seeing chaos and a
reality in front of our own eyes and calling it out.
I mean the most it's the most photographed crime in
human history. If we as Americans can't watch that and
say we don't support this, this is the line. And
it felt like there was a moment where that was

(32:48):
the narrative and that was discussed, and so yes, I
thought that was the end of the Trump chapter, at
least in terms of being president. That there this this
MAGA movement is still looking for a leader and that
won't die out. I didn't think it would end quite
that quick, But the fact that it has resurfaced like
this and he's found his way back into office, I
don't think I fully saw it coming. Although as I

(33:10):
started to go back on the trail. The numbers steem lower,
But it didn't seem like it was impossible for it
to happen.

Speaker 1 (33:16):
Again, finding that meaning and community once again. But I
mean you also had to find your way back. I
think the interesting thing about you is it's one thing
to go back. During COVID, you got a mask on.
There's some anonymity. People know you but don't really know you.
I mean, how in the hell do you show up
at a Trump rally nowadays? I mean, you're too well known, Sorry,

(33:37):
my friend. You have security, I mean now that security
is not just there for a moment like January sixth.
I mean, and you've got infamous examples of people that
will see you, call you out, call you fake news,
the bricksuit man will get to him in a minute,
among others. There's sort of these infamous interactions that you've
had over the years. But how is it, I mean,
how is how is that journey now in terms of

(33:59):
ricond out or you get to know all these people
and they love you, like, hey, George, I go to
see you, buddy.

Speaker 2 (34:03):
I I I have friends that I see at these
rallies now and I know all of the all the
T shirt salesmen were pals. We see each other every
every week. I do have multiple friends who I've talked
to over the years that it's it's nice to like
reconnect with and see how their thoughts have changed or
if they haven't. And it is remarkable, like sometimes people

(34:24):
will seek out to talk to me, sometimes people will
say no way. I think the thing that was both
eye opening and disheartening was I went to Seapack a
couple of years ago and assumed, assume going to sea Pack,
that no one would want to talk to me, that
that's it's sort of ridiculous that we got credentials to
be there, but we'll see who would want to talk

(34:44):
to me. I was a rock star at Seapack and
and it and for two reasons, like there was a
line of young Republican Congress hopefuls who wanted to talk
to me.

Speaker 3 (34:58):
We're desperate to talk to me.

Speaker 2 (35:00):
And literally you saw it. I saw Marjorie Taylor Green
walk through the hall with ten press behind her, and
you see these young congress folks, these hopefuls from the
middle of Indiana who are watching her, and they're like,
oh my god, that's the attention. What do I need
to do. What do I need to do? Let me
talk to this guy. Let me talk to this guy.
And so there was the line literally handing my producer cards,

(35:21):
please talk to me. I would love to talk to you.
You're just like, oh, these are And I talked to
a few people. These are moderate, good, young, nice people
running for office. But you see their head shifting where
they're like, oh, that's not the game. The game I
have to be big. I have to court a fight
with this guy. I got to own the libs. I
have to do this. And then secondarily I ran into

(35:42):
a maga fans at Seapack, specifically like this eighteen or
nineteen year old boy who is a Trump super fan,
and he showed me pictured in his home of Trump
cutouts and posters, pictures with Trump he loved. His whole
identity was Donald Trumpy. And he sought me out. He
was like, I want to talk to you to get pictures.
I asked to point Blake. I was like, you know
who I am, you know what I want to talk about,

(36:06):
you know my point of view. Why do you want
to talk to me? And he's like, you're part of it,
You're part of the world. You're one of the bad guys,
get a picture with me, and it's I'm the heel
like like in the UFC world. These guys they don't
like me, but I'm the bad guy to them in
this world, so they want to picture with it. And
it's a game and it's a performance, so collect all

(36:28):
the characters try to get their autographs.

Speaker 3 (36:31):
It's it's just a game to be played.

Speaker 1 (36:33):
Any You have no idea how much that resonates with
me and how much I appreciate that. I mean, have
so many similar experiences on those lines. It's so what
I mean, you know, I well, let me go back,
because idea of people are like, what the hell is
he talking about with this brick suit man. But yes,
I think it goes to the essence of what you
just described as well, which is your ability to connect

(36:54):
with the other side and the challenges that we all
have connecting with people that we vehemently disagree with in
terms of world view and points of view. Just you know,
with so many people's just I don't understand how hot
what's going on in my Linde. It just makes no sense,
et cetera. And you had an interesting infamous and I
don't want to beliebor it because it's it's well chronicle.
But you know, like this three and a half hour

(37:14):
conversation with someone that was going after you at one
of the Trump rallies and the two of you just
happened to get stuck in an airport I think in
Green Bay, Wisconsin, my memory serves, and you guys are
stuck together waiting for a damn plane. Just the lucky
You know, what are the chances of this? And so
you had nothing else to do, So he ended up
spending all that time well, shitting back and forth.

Speaker 2 (37:36):
What happened, Yeah, it's we we got to know each
other as humans and not as performers in front of
a medium, and it was it was a remarkable day.
Like like you said, he spent the entire shoot day
heckling our camera crew. And he's sort of an infamous

(37:56):
maga celebrity that Trump brings on stage because he's dressed
like the border wall. And when I see him at
the airport, the last thing I wanted to do was
spend three and a half hours talking and fighting with
this guy over politics. But it was remarkable in that,
like I joke that we're away from our mediums. But
it is true, like our guards were down, Like he's

(38:17):
he's not performing for a camera and playing a part
of the bricksuit guy. That doesn't mean that he's not
He doesn't believe many of the things that he talks about.
I don't think he's insincere in that, but I think
he's a larger version of certainty that exists in his
heart as am I as a person who was in
front of the camera as well, and with no cameras,

(38:37):
no microphones. When we got past like is this person
recording something to try to make the other person look
bad like, then we just started talking about his certainties
around Trump. I think what was surprising to me, Like
he talked about like again is he's in some ways
the manifestation of like a Trump supporter. But he would
articulate to me was that he wears the bricksuit because

(39:00):
he sees it as a meme and memes our attention
getting and he wants the attention of a camera and
he wants to articulate that maga vision because he sees
himself as more articulate in the ways of Trump than
other people.

Speaker 3 (39:11):
And I don't think he's wrong.

Speaker 2 (39:12):
I think that's.

Speaker 3 (39:13):
Probably a savvy move.

Speaker 2 (39:15):
But as we talked beyond the cameras, like he talked
about how he didn't think Trump won the last election,
which is bonkers. Not to believe the big lie if
you are the big face. They told me he wished
he'd move on. He had political disagreements with him. He
had more of a libertarian streak and loved to be
an online troll. That seemed to be most of his personality,
and he would be open about that. He loved to

(39:37):
go on Reddit boards, stir shit up and get people upset.
That's sort of what he thought was funny and comedic,
and so like, I got it. It wasn't my thing.
He was way into history. He was a smart guy.
This is the thing that I always think about when
progressive people, when Democrats come up to me and they
want to say, like, oh, all those crazy people you
talk to, Like I talk to people who believe crazy things,

(39:59):
and you need to understand those are separate things and
bricksuit guy. I don't agree with the things he talks about.
But the man who has a handlebar mustache and five
bespoke brick suit that he goes up on stage and
talks about you'd like to think he's an idiot, and
he's not. He's smart. He's smart. And we talked. We
had good conversations. We found if not common ground, like

(40:23):
we softened on some of the certainties that we had
around issues that we were less aware of than perhaps
we would perform in front of a camera. When I
say this, the moment that sticks with me is like
we got on the train of the plane, still talking,
and I was in an exit row and was asked
if I wanted to took on the responsibilities of being
in an exit row, and I took to him, and

(40:44):
I mischievously say, I hope this freaks you the fuck out, man,
and he laughs, and and in retrospective, like that's it.
Every conversation I have with so many other people, you
don't to the point where you're actually laughing together, because
your identity is at stake, because any challenge to your certainty,

(41:05):
any challenge to a thing you have said, is seen
as like an existential attack on who you are. But
I knew who this guy was. I spent three and
a half hours with him. We connected on some stuff,
and so when I poked him, he didn't crumble. Didn't
just explode into just dust. He laughed, and I laughed back,

(41:26):
and I'm like, oh, that still exists. That exists in America.
We're not as polarized as some people would say that
the conversation pulls us that way, and it looks that way.
But if you can spend three and a half hours
with somebody in a Green Bay airport, you're gonna at
least at least get to the point where you believe
the same premise of the joke, and that to me

(41:46):
speaks to not separate realities, but at least a generalized understanding.

Speaker 1 (41:51):
No, well, I thank you for sharing that story. I
think it's incredibly important. It's what we need to hear
right now, because I mean, I keep saying a divorce
is not an option, and at the end of the day,
we've got to live together across our differences, and it's exhausting.
I mean, it is this zero sum thinking, this notion.
You know that you know everybody's just at each other

(42:13):
twenty four to seven. You feel like you know you're
waking up and you know people are trying to put
a crowbar in the spokes of the wheels of your front
tire and trip you up. And so this notion that we,
you know, are all better off, We're all better off,
this notion that we all want to be loved and
need to be loved is so foundational. But at the
same time, I imagine for you it's still a struggle in

(42:33):
terms of changing minds, because I've seen so many clips
with you where you've presented something, you know, just a
perfect example, you had a woman who was very upset
that a notion that a woman I think Kamala Harris
at the time may have been Hillary, but I think
it was commona was going to be president because she said,
as a woman, she says, too many hormones, she's going

(42:53):
to get us into a war. And your immediate retort is, well,
haven't all the wars been started by men? And she
paused and still went on. I mean, you didn't change
her mind in this notion of changing minds, changing hearts,
changing behaviors. I imagine that's been a struggle for you
with all of these interactions.

Speaker 2 (43:14):
Yeah, it is. I mean, I will say the intention
of these interactions is not to change. The intention is
like again, my bias is towards comedy, finding hypocrisy and irony,
and more often than not, it's like, I'm curious as
to how far the propaganda has spread and how deep
it is inside these people's mindsets, and so I don't

(43:38):
find people's minds being changed being confronted with information, and
frankly across the board in my personal life as well,
it's like, oh, this idea that, oh, if I have
the information and give this person, that mind will get changed.
I think one of my favorite interactions was I was
talking to a woman during Trump's first impeachment and she

(43:59):
was talking about how Trump is innocent and this was
the time when he was blocking testimony from John Bolton
amongst other peoples.

Speaker 3 (44:07):
And I said, well, if he.

Speaker 2 (44:08):
Was innocent, he wouldn't be blocking people from testifying. And
she's like, exactly, he's innocent. He wants everybody to speak,
he wants everybody to testify. And I was like, well,
so if he was blocking people, that would be like
proof of his guilt.

Speaker 3 (44:18):
He was like, of course, of course, but he's not
doing that.

Speaker 2 (44:21):
I say, he is doing that, and she takes this
really long beat and she thinks about it, she really
hears me, and then she goes, I don't care and
that's I was like, thank you, because more often than not,
the conversations that I have out there, the politics is
the pretense, it's the fun, it's the paying that people have.
This is an identity for so many people, and they

(44:43):
will jump into the abortion debate and some people believe
it vehemently, but more often than not, it's just the
the tools you use to play the identity. And so
when it comes to like changing people's minds, changing people's
identity is hard. Once you put on that hat, people
see you in that hat. And it's not just that
you can take the hat off, because your whole community
saw you as the guy with that hat. And that's

(45:05):
a hard thing. It's beyond just buying it. It's how
you are perceived. It's how now your families see you.
It's I think about like families who have now lived
in this this Trump era.

Speaker 3 (45:14):
For twelve years.

Speaker 2 (45:17):
You've lost friendships, family members based on it. Like, to
change your mind is a big, big, big ask.

Speaker 3 (45:23):
And so I don't I don't think it. I don't.
I don't think it happens.

Speaker 2 (45:27):
With just facts, but I do think, Like, to me,
what I'm always on and on about is this certainty
that we have that I think is so unbecoming.

Speaker 3 (45:37):
And it is.

Speaker 2 (45:38):
It is. It is a necessary trait in the world
of social media and online engagement to be the most certain,
loudest version of yourself. But the only way that I've
seen any kind of movement and change or like with
the bricksuit guy, like a moment or a space for that,
it comes with with uncertainty that I bring to the table,

(46:02):
and then he can match it. And so for all
of my well meaning, thoughtful progressive folks who are like,
if I just get the right information an article to
give to my cousin, it will be fine. Like I
don't think it's going to do it, give it a shot.
But to me, the only stopping I've seen is when
you enter the conversation with an I don't know or

(46:24):
something you are uncertain about, which is a scary place.
The internet doesn't want you to start that way, but
like that invitation has been the only way to get
somebody else to at least like like, at least bring
the barricades down a bit, to let some new light
in and see.

Speaker 1 (46:48):
I love the words you're using. You talk about meaning,
You talk about community and the power of identity and
how you shake that identity but with humility and grace.
And I think it begs the question hardly the words
you would use typically with this topic. But the Epstein issue,
I mean that invites what to you in this whole conversation,

(47:10):
what does Epstein mean in relationship to everything you just said.

Speaker 2 (47:13):
Well, it's fascinating to watch it play out on the
right because it does feel like it feels like a
promise broken right now. It's Epstein and this idea of
this conspiracy that would come out with something I heard
on the trail for the last eight years, and and
I do think to me, like we've we've talked a

(47:36):
little bit about this in some off camera about like
about the difficulty of governing. And I think so many people,
so many people who go to a Trump rally and
are there are there just for the show and the community.
I think part of it's because there's a disconnect between
what they see governing as and what politics is. Like

(47:58):
I think like they have they feel disconnected from what
government can do for them, and so therefore they might
as well have fun with the game of the politics.
And Trump is like, well, let me just play the
politics part and when he gets into the governing part
where I'm curious about right now, I was like, well,
there's a connection. Now. Now this person actually has the
power that you have given them. Do you like this big,
beautiful bill. Do you like your healthcare options right now?

(48:19):
Do you like what's happening at the border? Do you
like the information that you're getting or not getting about
Jeffrey Epstein? But Trump is done a good job of
living in the chasm between politics and governing, and so
I do think there is a real disconnect with so
many people who voted for Trump, not with a true
idea that they thought he would change things, but that
he was the most interesting version to be in a

(48:40):
system that they thought could never change. So I think
we're in that right now. And the Epstein thing is
cracks in a bit, because if you really, if you've
really bought into this conspiratorial mindset which a lot of
people have, and that these people can deliver this truth
to you, it's hard not to see the writing that

(49:01):
is on the wall Ockham's razor is super sharp here
about why some of this information might be withheld, why
you're not getting all the things you were promised. And
I think we're going to see all the shucking and
driving from the Trump administration trying to get you to
focus on something else. But it is an inherent lie
towards the Trump brand that I don't know what the

(49:23):
long term effects of it will be, but I think
his success will be in the fact that if he's
created a populace that is so pessimistic about the effect
of the government, then he may win out in this.
But if there's actually some faith left in that these
people can do good for you, he's gonna have a

(49:44):
hard time writing that circle.

Speaker 1 (49:48):
Before we close. Or I'm interested and I want to
connect back to that eighteen nineteen year old guy that
you know, just his identity, speaking of identity was all
attached to yeah, to Trump, but also to you in
some respects that that's all part of this sort of
dialectic and this game is you describe it and everything's
everyone's relationship to one another, the good versus the bad,

(50:11):
you know, the truth all that. What you know if
you've seen just through your journey, you look at young
folks and you you know you've done a lot on masculinity.
You've talked about you know, we're we talk so much
about telling boys what not to be. We don't talk
about what they should be. And there's the andrew Tates
of the world that infamously sort of fill that void.

(50:33):
And and we've seen that weaponize with trump et cetera.
And you see that eighteen nineteen year old, you see
your own son. Where are we in terms of the
generational shift on all of this, even in the distinction
you just made around campaigning versus governing and the relationship
to Epstein in that, but is there? Do you see
any generational changes underway? Do you see any hope in

(50:57):
that distinction young versus old, new versus you know what's
I mean?

Speaker 3 (51:04):
I do.

Speaker 2 (51:04):
I think your podcast with Richard Reeves I thought was great,
and I think there's a lot of people talking really
in depth about this crisis of masculinity that's happening right now,
which I'm seeing echoed in all the places that I
go to this I did especial recently that was looking
at sort of the new MAGA movement, and where I

(51:26):
found hope was sort of in a surprising place. I
went to a Turning Points event, I went to a
UFC event, and I think I was in my mind
I think, especially at like the Turning Points, Texas A
and m event, I was expecting maybe the most extreme
of the MAGA movement to be echoed in these eighteen

(51:46):
year olds. And when I went down down there and
talked to the students, I think what I was surprised by.
They were conservative. Most of them also are very very religious.
But when I talked to them about like, they didn't
they didn't care about the cultural war stuff. Now it
doesn't mean Charlie Kirk, who is you know, one hundred

(52:07):
feet away, I know you've spoke it to as well,
like he will get on that culture war stuff and
he wants to talk about that stuff. And it doesn't
mean that these students won't hear that, I won't glomb
onto it. But it wasn't top of mind for folks,
and I naively assumed a cruelty that did not exist
in the eighteen year olds that I talked to. I
thought when we talked about deportations that they would chomp

(52:30):
on the bit. I thought we talked about trans athletes
or LGBTQ rights, that like a wall would go up
or cruelty would emerge, And frankly, it didn't happen the
people I talked to were interested in jobs, They were
interested in the country, patriotic talking about like defense security,

(52:52):
but they didn't they didn't care about LGBTQ not They
didn't care about LGBTQ issues as a way to like
to fight over or to be upset about. They wanted
people to have equal rights and protections and and and
I think it be keep aware to me, I was like,
I'm projecting a cruelty that exists within this movement that
I think it does exist. I think the Trump administration

(53:12):
thrives on the cruelty, uh and and and that as
a tool to to create obedience. But when I talk
to the youth, they are looking for attention and also
meaning and community. And I saw turning points as an
interesting example of like, oh, they're like, oh, what is
this thing over here? This thing that's popular online? Oh, online,

(53:34):
the place that everybody either becomes an influencer or doesn't
like that. That's the sphere I want to be a
part of. Let me go pay attention to that. And
weren't interested in the cruelty of that message, but they
were interested in the performance of that message. They were
interested in the popularity of that message. But at their core,
these were these were nice kids who were still forming

(53:55):
their own worldview in a in a kind space. And
so when I think of that younger generation and I think,
I think there there is a kindness there that is
not that that that is that is different than the hardened,
older maga uh generation that we see right now. And
I and I hope, I hope there's space for them
to find find what they care about and do good

(54:15):
in this world and not sort of be manipulated by
these these older generations who want nothing more than to
to weaponize these these points of view and these these
malleable minds.

Speaker 1 (54:26):
And two final questions, I want to I'll go, I
want to go back as we began on Redistrict for
different reasons perhaps, and so may think, but I want
to pick up just what you said. You know, if
someone's listening to this, they're saying, Okay, we're we're now
in sort of the megasphere, we're talking about the manosphere.
We're in that zeigeist but without the situational awareness that
a lot of this sort of ideological identity politics, the

(54:49):
sort of notion of community and meaning also finds its
way on the left as well, uh not denied that.
What you know in terms of that to the extent
that does exist and what has to stipulate it does?
What is the What have you learned about Maga? We
talked about repetition, We talked about that sense, that broader

(55:10):
sense of community. What Trump has provided people in that space?
Any prescription for Democrats, any prescription for my party that's struggling.
I mean, you know, the Wall Street Journal lowest you know.
I mean, you know, there's no doubt you look at
the polling on the Democratic Party. Some don't like it,
referred to as toxic, but it's toxic for a lot

(55:31):
of people. People sort of immediately are moving away from it.
What's your over under in terms of what we can
do differently or better? Are there lessons that we can
learn from the MAGA movement? There, I say, or suggests
from the experiences you've had in those hundred rallies ninety
two hundred rallies with humility and grace that I think

(55:52):
a party that is out of power needs.

Speaker 2 (55:55):
Yeah. I mean I think there's there's like there's functional things,
which is like meeting people where they are, and I
think like literally we joke about this, but it is
it is podcast the internet, like understand the conversation where
you need to have those conversations. I think that's like,
that's that's baseline. But a big part of what I
see a younger generation connecting to is authenticity. And it

(56:19):
feels it took me a while to see what was
authentic about Donald Trump in so many ways, a very
authentic human being who's constantly projecting things that are untrue.
But the feeling of Donald Trump is one that I
think is received as authentic for so many people there.
He feels like, if not a true teller, somebody who
says it like it is, who's not beholden two other

(56:41):
things again, the veracitor, the of that I don't stand for,
but I do see people like, oh, they don't see
him as a politician. Where they connect with him is
on an authentic space. And I do when I hear
the Democratic Party to talk about you know who is,
who are the next space is? And how do we
do this? And I know you're a part of that conversation.
The aocs are part of the conversation.

Speaker 3 (57:02):
In New York.

Speaker 2 (57:03):
Mamdani is such an interesting part of the conversation, right.

Speaker 3 (57:07):
Now where that on a local level was.

Speaker 2 (57:10):
Really fascinating to watch, Like all the prognosticators said like, oh,
this isn't how New York works, this is how politics works.
But then there's this guy who's like, ah, I want
to talk about stuff that I think is important, which
is like jobs and people are hurting. Jobs, people are hurting.
How can we give them something to look forward to?
And I know how to do that in a way
that doesn't feel political, it feels authentic, And that broke

(57:32):
through in a way that I think a lot of
New Yorkers are like, huh, everybody told us this wouldn't
break through. I think this next wave of democratic leadership
and this party needs to needs to one to know people.
People want action and they want people who authentically want
to make change. I don't know how, Like I do
think what the Republican Party has done so well is

(57:54):
create a party of like pointing at them and they
are the problems. And I think you're seeing now, like
what can they solve in GOUM.

Speaker 3 (58:00):
Governing is hard. I don't need to tell you that.

Speaker 2 (58:04):
I understand the difficulties within it all and that how
slow it is. But I think big action by Democrats
to really go after those core issues of health and
of jobs, by somebody who feels like they're talking man
on man with the Democratic populace. I feel like that's
where it's going to live. And so much of the

(58:25):
party I hear talking about like are we too left,
are we too moderate?

Speaker 3 (58:28):
Are we this way or this way?

Speaker 2 (58:29):
I'm like that gets in the way, Like you need
to be a person Like right now, all of these kids,
these younger generations, they are staring at phones with a
person that they feel connected to, who tells them to
buy this lipstick, They tell them to vote this way,
They tell them this is cool or this is not cool,
and they listen. You need to be an authentic person

(58:50):
who can communicate. And that's why you can look like
Bernie Sanders or could look like aot to very different
people of different generations, but who feel authentic to an audience.
It's like, I think that mess just has to feel authentic,
be authentic, and be one of like of change, because
people feel so scared right now and so nervous right now.

(59:10):
Like this idea of who has a vision for change
that I can believe and trust, I think that's what
people want everybody, and even on the right where cracks
in the MAGA movement. It's like, tell me that you
see a way that this can be better and bigger
and fairer. I think that is a populis message that
like the Dems can can own.

Speaker 1 (59:29):
I want to end there, but I want to get
to redistricting because the tactics of that and what Donald
Trump I mean, he was on CNBC today and he
was asked about the Texas redistrict and he said that
he's earned the right to have those five seats. I mean,
it's analogous to the hour long phone call with the
Secretary of State in Georgia. Find me eleven thousand, however

(59:52):
many twelve thousand votes. Now, he says to Greg Abbott,
the governor of Texas, find me five seats. And he said,
I won Texas overwhelmingly, so tho are my seats? And
in order to make everything else possible to have that
conversation about health care and about affordability, and about being
able to even introduce yourself as the authentic self when
we're rigging a system or changing the game mid census

(01:00:15):
in this case, that's pretty damn alarming. You were there
on January sixth. Now this guy realizes in eighteen months
he may have some oversight with a different majority, the
Democratic majority in Congress, in the House in particular, and
so he wants to rewrite the rules. What is your
sense of that in relationship to everything else? And what

(01:00:37):
does it mean to you? Is it about power, dominance
and aggression? Is it the brand MAGA? Is it? Is it?
Is it about strength versus weakness? You know sort of
that framework? Is that? Is that a paradigm that's you
know that you've observed Democrats, Republicans? What MAGA? What Trump represents?
What does it redistrictly mean at this moment? Yours from

(01:00:59):
your respect?

Speaker 2 (01:00:59):
I mean, honestly, I think this moment is so fascinating.
It's I'm you know, I'm I'm honored to get to
talk to you about it in this this time we
are in because I'm I'm reading this nude right now.
It's it's such a such an obvious power grab, and
it's scary, it's authoritarian, it's it's anti democratic and and

(01:01:20):
to me, where I see it in Omaga movement is
it will be lauded.

Speaker 3 (01:01:24):
As a success.

Speaker 2 (01:01:25):
You know, I do think we talk about the cruelty
that is inherent there. But I think, like so much
a part of this identity is in making other people
pay that like to the victor, go the spoils. It's
it's you know, I'm It's been Trump's brand forever, like
it's it's capitalism one o one. It's like, I get
this because I work the hardest, screw you work a
little bit harder. And so I feel like that is

(01:01:46):
like a new framing device for democracy, which I wish
I I I wish we were able to push back
against that. And so you have what you guys are
talking about doing here too, which I will say I have,
like I don't know how to feel about it. I
am so scared as to what Trump is doing and

(01:02:06):
it is so unfair and so undemocratic and and just
a powagram. And on one hand, I'm like, I want
to see I want to see democratic governors and democrats
fight back, fight fire with fire. I think that is
what there is a real yearning for. And at the
same time, I am scared to run into like an
undemocratic arms race, and so I don't I don't know,

(01:02:29):
like even walking into this podcast, I'm like, man, I
respect that something that you do well as I think
you step up to the plate with Donald Trump and
you punch a bully in their chin. And I think
that is a big part of where the Democratic base
can find success in this movement. And yet I worry about, like,
where are the norms that we have to keep in

(01:02:49):
place and where are the norms that we have to
throw out in order to be in a place where
norms can exist?

Speaker 1 (01:02:56):
Well said, I mean it's as someone that's supported independent
redistrict as an elected official. When at first was presented
to the voters of California, it took me a little
bit to get on the other side of this. But
now I'm realizing to your point the existential nature of
this moment and the other side there are no rules.
There are assassins in this respect in terms of the
approach they take to power and to ultimately control. And

(01:03:20):
so you know, we're not only going to fight fire
with fire, We're gonna punch above our weight. California is
the size of twenty one state populations combined. We have
an independent redistricting. We have not jerry mandered our state.
No state has more to give to this contribution of
the counter offensive than the state of California. So we'll

(01:03:42):
neuter what they're doing in Texas, but we'll one up
that because we'll take some of the more competitive districts
and they'll be less competitive as a consequence. And your point,
it's an arms race. I'm not naive about that, but
it's also you know, we're raced to two point fifty
next year. Is that found the celebration of the Founding
Fathers in the vision that the Founding Fathers laid out

(01:04:05):
the best of Roman republic, Greek democracy, system of checks
and balances, the rule of law, popular sovereignty, it's all
all at risk. And so forgive me for belaboring the point.
But I think the point you're making is a difficult one.
Is how you reconcile those two things. You want to
do the right thing, you want to you know, sort
of aspire to the you know, the better angels, but

(01:04:27):
we also have to be accountable to this moment.

Speaker 3 (01:04:31):
To be clear, you think we're gonna make it to
two fifty.

Speaker 1 (01:04:34):
We're gonna, we have no choice, but we of course
we're gonna build the hell.

Speaker 3 (01:04:39):
I don't know.

Speaker 2 (01:04:39):
I'm looking at property in Montreal, just trying to get
a sentence of like, Okay, do you think.

Speaker 1 (01:04:44):
You give us worry about singularity and AI?

Speaker 2 (01:04:46):
So you're a get all everything, cover to everything.

Speaker 1 (01:04:49):
Oh yeah, we didn't even get to AI, thank god.
But enough of the anxiety, hey, Jordan, Uh, thank you man.
This was this was a great not good This was
a great conversation. Uh it was. And you know what, uh,
you know, keep doing what you're doing. But also, you know,
if you need a you need another job. If if

(01:05:12):
these sons of bitches figure out a way to cancel
the Daily Show uh and try to cancel you, you're
going to be in the political consulting business soon. So
you're fine, my friend.

Speaker 2 (01:05:22):
Are you are you offering me one of these Congress seats?
Is that what you're doing?

Speaker 1 (01:05:26):
Oh? I know, that's been your dream in life, that's
been your aspiration. You see a little improv on the
on the house. Then you get Gnarley what but what's
her name?

Speaker 2 (01:05:37):
Mark?

Speaker 1 (01:05:37):
Marjorie Taylor Green?

Speaker 2 (01:05:38):
Every day of the week, I'm gonna say, what what
a what a lovely workplace to walk into.

Speaker 1 (01:05:44):
Jesus, And we didn't even get to mac Gates to
be continued.

Speaker 2 (01:05:48):
Oh my gosh, Yes, Well, I got plenty of stories,
so have me on for around two This was this
was this was truly a delight.

Speaker 1 (01:05:55):
I appreciate it, I appreciate Thanks so much, man, that
was great. Thank you Rob.

Speaker 2 (01:06:02):
Them located at