October 13, 2025 • 47 mins
Gavin Newsom sits down with Senator Chris Murphy to discuss if Trump cares about the human impact of a government shutdown and whether bipartisanship is still possible in today’s polarized climate. Then they dive into the mounting tensions of putting troops in the streets, and how Democrats can redefine their brand amidst the chaos.
0:00 Intro
1:40 - Oversight Hearing
5:26 -Trump Is Rooting For A Shutdown
11:10 - Dems Need To Unite Right Now
16:04 - Is Bipartisanism Dead?
21:50 - Troops In The Streets
26:17 The Democratic Brand
30:48 Loneliness & Young People
36:00 Totalitarianism & Monopolies
40:29 2026 And Beyond
Mentioned In This Episode: Chris Murphy's Atlantic Article
SUBSCRIBE NOW: https://linktr.ee/govgavinnewsom
Email: TIGNPod@gmail.com
Substack: Gavinnewsom
Phone: 855-6NEWSOM
See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:00):
So salitarianism and monopoly go in and don't make the
healthcare system any worse, don't jack up premiums on people
by seventy five percent, and.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Don't act lawlessly.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
History tells us that when the people stand up, something
magical happens.
Speaker 3 (00:12):
Well, I don't need to remind everybody that the government
is shut down, but we are not shut out from
getting a deeper understanding of what's going on in Washington, DC,
because we have one of the most prominent democratic voices,
someone who has been a fierce defender of democracy and
free speech, who is one of the leaders in the
resistance against Trump and trump Ism, that can unpack and
(00:36):
unveil what's going on with healthcare in this country, what's
going on in terms of negotiation with the government shut down,
but also broad in the aperture to what's going on
in American cities with the increasing militarization with our National Guard,
and what's happening to the state of our democracy. This
(00:59):
is Gavin Newson. This is Senator Chris Murphy. Senator Murphy,
it's great that you took the time to be with
us today. I continue to make this point behind your
back anytime I'm asked, they said, who do you admire
out there in the Democratic Party? Who from your perspective,
particularly in Washington, TC stands out And every single time
(01:22):
first name comes out of my mouth is you, sir.
And so I'm grateful for this opportunity to check in
and check up on what's going on in this country,
including just what happened as we're taping this. Just an
hour or so ago Pam Bondy, the Attorney General of
the United States, at an oversight hearing that sounded more
(01:43):
like cross examination coming from Pam Bondy doing op research
on Democratic senators.
Speaker 1 (01:49):
So what was your reflection of that, Well, Governor, awesome
to be with you, man, The compliment is turned straight
back around.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
What you're doing out in California is.
Speaker 1 (01:59):
Absolutely a central People need to feel like we are powerful,
not powerless right now, and you're delivering people that sensation
that there's still things we can do to save our democracy. Yeah,
I mean I watched some clips of that hearing. You know,
she acts like, you know, somebody who works for a
guy who believes he's a king, right it, believes that
they're accountable to no one. She clearly showed zero deference
(02:22):
for the United States Congress and Senate. That's probably understandable
given her combative boss and how you know what she
wants folks out there making news and creating viral clips.
But you know, it just is representative of the way
the entire administration operates. They're not bound by the law,
they're not bound by the Constitution. They don't believe they're
(02:44):
accountable to the people. They certainly don't believe they're accountable
to the Senate. And I think that's wearing thin on folks.
You know, eighty percent of Americans now say that we're
in the middle of a political crisis. More than fifty
percent of the country is worried about losing their right
to free.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
Speech and the show.
Speaker 1 (03:00):
So I don't think she does her boss any favors by,
you know, acting so childish representing the Department of Justice
in front of the United States Senate. I don't know
if you think differently.
Speaker 3 (03:13):
It's interesting, and you know, I want to unpack that
because I think the point you're making is an important
point about how quote unquote unpopular so many of the positions,
not just the president's overall popularity itself, but a lot
of the positions he has been promoting, including members of
his own administration. But I wonder if just in the
administration of oversight, did you reflect on that and reflect
(03:35):
on the fact that Democrats may need to change their
tactics in terms of how they even begin to, you know,
prepare for subsequent oversight hearings.
Speaker 1 (03:46):
Yeah, I mean, these hearings are becoming jokes because she's
not even attempting to answer these questions. You know, when
we send basic oversight letters to these agencies to ask
questions about how they're spending money, they never ever respond.
And so yeah, I do think you need to understand
(04:07):
that right now, they perceive these hearings to be reality
TV shows, and you're, unfortunately, whether you like it or not,
going to have to approach the hearings in that way.
But I also think Governor, you know that we've got
to make clear that the oversight here, especially when it
comes to the illegality, is permanent, right because someday Democrats
(04:29):
are going to be back in charge of the House
and the Senate. Someday we're going to have the power
of subpoenas. Someday there's going to be people in the
Department of Justice who actually want to administer the law
on its face, and so I just think we're going
to need to say to these folks and save your records,
because if any of you have committed actual, real illegality,
(04:51):
you know you are ultimately going to have to be
held accountable for that, either by being hauled before Congress
and be forced to swim in and tell the truth
and be held accountable for perjury, or before a court
of laws. So the oversight is going to be much
more real and much more forceful when Democrats are back
(05:11):
in charge.
Speaker 2 (05:13):
And we'll get to getting back in charge.
Speaker 3 (05:15):
Talk a little bit about redistricting in twenty twenty six,
particularly as it relates to not just the Senate but
obviously the House. But first I want to sort of
paint the picture of where we are today where now
this government shut down. We haven't broken any records, but
were not necessarily break in any new ground in terms
of breakthroughs based upon at least what I'm reading and
(05:37):
understanding and hearing, as it relates to the prospects of
a deal, where you think things stand at this stage,
and how do you think we have positioned ourselves the
Democratic Party, and how do you think we get out
on the other side.
Speaker 1 (05:52):
Well, I mean, I think it's first of all important
to understand that Trump is rooting for a shutdown, right
because he does believe that he has these extraordinary powers.
He's come to believe that those powers get bigger in
a shutdown. That's not true. He also roots for chaos,
and the fact of the matter is there's more chaos
when the government is shut down. Cruelty is the point
(06:15):
to this administration, and things get crueler when head start
centers don't open and federal employees don't get their paycheck.
But what Democrats' priorities are here are pretty damn reasonable.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
What are we asking for.
Speaker 1 (06:31):
We're saying, listen, the healthcare system isn't fair and it's
a mess. We just don't want it to get worse
this fall, when premiums are scheduled to increase on people
who have Affordable Care Act plans by seventy one hundred percent.
So let's just make sure that those premium increases don't
go into effect. And then second, let's make sure that
if we write a budget that says you have to
(06:53):
spend money in all fifty states, the president is actually
required to spend money in all fifty states instead of
not spending money in places like California, in New York
and Connecticut that are represented by Democrats and spending money
in states represented by Republicans. So I mean our asks
are pretty minimalist. Just don't make the healthcare system any worse,
don't jack up premiums on people by seventy five percent,
and don't act lawlessly. If we get those two things
(07:17):
included in this budget, then I think you're going to
see democratic votes, and I think increasingly the American publicers
are beginning to see that, you know, what we're asking
for is pretty damn popular and not terribly piggish.
Speaker 3 (07:30):
And it seems to have been reflected in the president's
own comments, where it seemed at least politically attuned to
the popularity of healthcare and the imperative to actually figure
this out, suggesting that he's quote unquote a Republican but
likes healthcare and thinks he can quote unquote make a deal,
but doesn't seem to me there's any substantive conversations, or
(07:52):
are there substantive conversations being held?
Speaker 1 (07:55):
There are not, and the clearest evidence of how unseerious
Republicans are about negotiating is the fact that they're not here,
so the House of Representatives is not in session. This
is the third week that they've been on kind of
an unscheduled recess. Part of that is that they don't
really want to negotiate away out of the shutdown. Part
(08:15):
of that we can talk about it is that they're
about to vote on the Epstein resolution, and a minute
they come back into session, a new Democrat will be
sworn in, giving them the magic number of votes on
a resolution that would force a debate and vote on
the Epstein resolution. But no, there are no real negotiations
(08:36):
happening right now. But you know, those premium increases are
getting closer and closer and closer, And as more Americans
get their notices that they're about to see a five thousand,
ten thousand dollars increase in premiums, the pressure is going
to mount on Republicans to come to the table and
reopen the government while also making sure that people don't
(08:56):
get hurt from a healthcare perspective. And I mean, you
know the real world consequences yere. We're not talking about numbers.
This isn't about politics. This is you know, people who
are going to have to make a really hard decision
about whether to keep their healthcare or let it lapse
and potentially based bankruptcy, or pay the increased premium and
just you know, have their kids go without lunch three
(09:16):
days a week, or just not have Christmas presents under
the tree this winter. I mean, their real consequences to
these premium spiking for middle class families all across the country.
Speaker 2 (09:28):
Yeah, I think.
Speaker 3 (09:28):
I mean the magnitude of those those premium increases are
pretty jaw dropping. Did we just put out in California, which,
of course we provide more coverage than any other state
just by the dairy nature and size and scope and
scale of our state. But we have very familiar here
on the exchange in California what they call the Bronze Plan,
which is the Middle Plan for folks and anthem. And
(09:50):
you got premiums that will go from three hundred and
seven dollars to nine hundred and sixty four dollars a month.
I mean, it's just so it's on average, we talk
about the agurate, but people will see tripling in some
cases up to three hundred and eighty eight percent and
an average of ninety seven percent of those increases, and
we expect six hundred thousand people to lose insurance because
they can't afford it in California, and I know we're
(10:13):
talking four plus million across the United States. So I
appreciate the painting of that picture with clarity and sticking
to two easy issues to understand. Congressionally approved appropriations. Congress
the purse, here's where money. We both approved the legislative
and executive branch where it needs to go. And the
(10:34):
President shouldn't utilaterally change that course, that commitment, that direction
and healthcare. But I'm curious if I could just step
back center what was without breaking confidence. But I'm curious
the Democratic Caucus the determination last time not to move
forward with the government shut down. Lessons learned the expectation
(10:59):
that you needed to prepare for this moment, particularly with
someone as you suggest, it was more interesting in golfing
before the shutdown, and obviously had no interest in meeting
with the leaders because he canceled that first meeting and
then in that last meeting just trolled those leaders in
the Oval Office with a twenty twenty eight Trump Patty
was never serious to your point about negotiating, but knowing
(11:20):
that was what was the journey since the last time,
we decided to continue to allow government to stay open
to the determination this time to get a little bit
tougher in terms of the approach.
Speaker 1 (11:32):
Yeah, you know, we have so few moments of leverage,
moments where we have power as a minority. Right Republicans,
whether we like it or not, they run the White House,
the House, and the Senate, and so when they do
need our votes, I mean, it's really our moral responsibility
on behalf of the people we represent to stand up
for things we believe, you know, not to you know,
(11:55):
be pollyannish about what we're ultimately going to get, but
to stand up for a few things that will help people.
You know, I disagreed with the decision backing in the
fall to vote for a budget that was essentially written
only by Republicans that didn't solve any of the problems
that they.
Speaker 2 (12:12):
Were in the midst of creating.
Speaker 1 (12:14):
But you know, a few things are different that I think,
you know, allows Democrats to be right now really united
around using our leverage.
Speaker 2 (12:22):
You know.
Speaker 1 (12:23):
One, you know, people see Trump I think more clearly
now than they did back then. As approval ratings are
you know, ten points lower too. The pain is you know,
more real now that that big beautiful bill has passed.
Premiums are about to go up on millions of Americans.
So the pain is acute right now in a way
that maybe it wasn't in March. And then, you know,
(12:44):
back in March, I think there were a lot of
folks who were worried about his attacks on democracy. But
maybe we're sort of hoping for the best case. Now
they see that we are in the middle of a
totalitarian takeover. If it's not arrested, if it's not stopped,
they are trying to rig the rules, and thank goodness
for you and what you're doing in California, they are
trying to you know, create a state run media.
Speaker 2 (13:06):
They are trying to use.
Speaker 1 (13:07):
The Department of Justice to suppress dissent and lock up
their critics. So you know, that level of alarm is
much higher. And I just think, you know, it's not
just Democrats who want us to fight and draw a line.
You know, it's a big part of the middle of
the country too. So the demand for us to show power,
I just think is a lot more amplified today that
(13:30):
it was back in the Spring, which is also why
so many people all around this country, left, middle, and
center are cheering what you're doing to show that we
are not powerless against his efforts to try to rig
the rules.
Speaker 3 (13:45):
So where do you see? I mean, is this we
look at another week, two month? I mean, you're going
to be back at this in seven, six and a
half weeks or six weeks. Isn't there another this sort
of date with destiny in terms of just extending this
narrative even be I know we're talking about this continuing
resolution seven weeks, but that just gets us to another
point where we're going to have another potential shut down.
(14:07):
I mean, is this the bond markets that ultimately we're
going to determine that we're going to break this chill?
Is it the stock market that ultimately is going to
force everybody to come to the table.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
What's your gut? Yeah?
Speaker 1 (14:22):
I mean my gut is that Republicans are already starting
to sweat a little bit. Something interesting happened just about
ten minutes ago. So we had our lunches today, the
Republicans all huddle for lunch, Democrats all huddle for lunch,
and the Republicans came out of their lunch with a
brand new message, one that we hadn't heard before. Their
(14:43):
message today was, well, Democrats have this big protest coming up.
This is the No King's Rally on October eighteenth, and
so they want to keep the government shut down until
the No King's Rally, which I've never heard from them before.
They clearly knew what they were saying yesterday was working,
and they're scrambling to come up with some new message.
(15:06):
And I think it's just all a sign Governor that
you know, they are feeling the heat because they're getting
more and more calls and emails from constituents who are like, hey,
what the hell are you going to do about this
seventy five percent increase. So my guess, if I had
to put money out of today, is that this isn't
another month that Republicans come to the table sometime soon
(15:27):
and say, listen, help help us, help ourselves. Let's get
rid of these premium increases and listen. That would that
would help a lot of people, and it would show,
you know, for the first time all year that you know,
the Democratic Party has fight and has relevance, and so
I love the optimism.
Speaker 3 (15:44):
I mean, it would be a hell of a victory
for millions and millions of Democrats, Republicans, independence. To your point,
the twenty plus million people that are directly impacted, millions
more indirectly impacted. It's not Democrats or Republicans. These are Americans,
and that would be that would be extraordinary outcome. Let
me ask you just you know, in terms of you've
(16:06):
used the word totalitarian. We started as it relates to
the oversight conversation about use the word Kings, not just
in relationship to the October eighteen NOME King's rally. I mean,
I remember the old Chris Murphy. You know, it was
the bipartisan you're working across the aisle, actually producing real results.
You know, I'm old enough to remember the most significant
(16:27):
at least in my lifetime thirty plus years, safer Communities Act,
the work you did mental health and gun safety in
a bipartisan way.
Speaker 2 (16:35):
But I've noticed much more well, I don't.
Speaker 3 (16:38):
Want to say strident, but I see a Democrat who's
leading the resistance that has more clarity on free speech
in terms of more conviction perhaps and expression around it,
as well as democracy and using language that I understand
that I think is very resident. I'm curious your own
evolution in that respect, and was there a moment that
sort of hit you where you said, I'm going to
(17:00):
I'm going to dial things up a little bit.
Speaker 1 (17:03):
Well, I mean, I appreciate that coming from you, because
we have also watched you at a moment where this
party has been desperate for leadership, bold leadership. We've seen
you step out and frankly take risks, which is which
is what I think this country is desperate for us
(17:23):
to do, to show that we understand the gravity of
this moment and show that we are willing to take
risks on behalf of saving the democracy.
Speaker 2 (17:30):
And probably fifty is a risk, right, not.
Speaker 1 (17:33):
Destined to succeed, but but can and will if we
put our work behind it. So I appreciate you saying that. Yeah, listen,
I just see these guys, and I saw these guys early.
They are not Democrats, small d you know, inside the
Republican Party, they have come to believe over the last
four years that democracy is just not worth it any
(17:54):
longer if it elects Democrats.
Speaker 2 (17:56):
They have come to believe.
Speaker 1 (17:57):
That, you know, our support for multiculturalism and civil rights
and human rights and feminism is you know, an assault
on the very idea of Americanism, and their version of
Americanism is a Christian, white male dominated America. So they
want to get rid of us at any cost, and
(18:19):
if that cost is the erasure or the weakening of democracy,
then they're willing to live with that. So to me,
this is all a plan. I mean, a really well
thought out plan to capture the media, to use the
doj to, which hunts to rig the rules, to change
the facts, as an attempt to just try to suffocate
(18:45):
the opposition so that.
Speaker 2 (18:46):
We don't have enough room to operate.
Speaker 1 (18:47):
And last thing I'll say is that, you know, I
think some people say, well, as long as there's you know,
no cancelation of elections, we're in good shape. Well I
don't think they're canceling the elections. I think they're just
going to, you know, do what they've done in Turkey
and Hungary and other countries like that, where the opposition
party still exists, but they just you know, don't have
enough space to operate, or the rules are are changed,
(19:10):
like the shape of districts, so that even if the
president is wildly unpopular, we can't win. I just see
these guys, and I know it sounds extreme to suggest
that Republicans are actually trying to engineer an erosion or
a destruction of our democracy. And I don't think every
Republican believes that there's still a lot of Republicans in
the Senate who want to protect democracy, but there are some,
(19:33):
there are some real radicals inside the White House who
do have plans to convert America to something different than
liberal democracy. And I just think we have to see
it and understand it so that we recognize, as you are,
you know, how loud our fight has to be.
Speaker 3 (19:48):
How do we overstate or do we understate the influence
of the omb director rest vote.
Speaker 1 (19:56):
I mean, I think he's just you know, one of
many in that White House who who's operationalizing this plan
to you know, constrict the space that the opposition has
to to operate. I mean, what he's doing recently is
another tried and true tactic of would be authoritarians. He's
you know, pausing funding for democratic states, and he's you know,
(20:19):
hoping that Democrats will essentially bend or self censor themselves
so that they get their money turned back on. It
wasn't lost on any of us in the Democratic Caucus
that when they canceled a whole bunch of energy projects.
One of the states that was exempted was Nevada. One
of the two Democratic centers from Nevada voted for Trump's
(20:40):
continuing resolution. So it's a very clear signal. If you
vote with me as a Democrat, your money will continue.
If you don't vote with me, the money's turned off. So,
you know, I just think he's he's playing his role,
But I tend to think that it's more, you know,
Stephen Miller and that crowd out of the White House
that's orchestrating a lot of the day to day operations
(21:00):
of trying.
Speaker 2 (21:02):
To on your mind our democratic norms, and.
Speaker 3 (21:04):
Those democratic norms now include the militarization of American cities.
We saw that obviously firsthand here in California, not just
with the federalization of the National Guard thousands and thousands,
but seven hundred active duty Marines that were sent to
a US city. We said it at the time, this
is a preview of things to come. Obviously Washington, DC
has its own criterion conditions, but clearly takes shape there
(21:28):
and now taking shape in cities large and small, Portland
attempting to militarize those streets with a federal judge appointed
by Trump who correctly has put a pause, but that's
not necessarily the case. And you brought up Stephen Miller
with what he's been able to effectuate in the city
of Chicago.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
Give us your sense of that.
Speaker 3 (21:51):
Trend line that's growing headlined now and where you think
things may go if we're not successful in pushing back.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
Well, it's incredibly dangerous, and I do think you have
to put it in this broader context. You know, at
the same time that they are sending our troops into
Portland and Chicago, they are also getting ready a campaign
to crack down on what they term, you know, far
left terrorist groups, but that list may include Indivisible and
(22:24):
move On, just basic run of the mill progressive activist
groups may all of a sudden be targeted by the
Department of Justice or by the IRS. And so what
they are doing is using the military, using the Department
of Justice, using the IRS to try to convince people
that you're just better off staying on the.
Speaker 2 (22:46):
Sidelines, right.
Speaker 1 (22:47):
I mean, we'd be naive to think that troops in
your city doesn't have an impact on people's willingness to
show up and protest. We'd be naive to think that
the threat of IRS action against you're not for profit
chills your interest to speak truth to power, say what
you think is true about the immorality of this administration.
Speaker 2 (23:06):
So again I.
Speaker 1 (23:08):
Think it's part of this big, broader plan, And again
it just raises the stakes on his budget fight, because yeah,
I want to get people's healthcare saved, but I also
have no moral obligation to vote for a budget that
funds the destruction of our democracy, that funds those operations
at the Department of Defense, at the Department of Revenue,
at the Internal Revenue Service. So that's why this budget
(23:31):
has to be, you know, not just good for our
healthcare system, but good for our democracy too.
Speaker 2 (23:35):
What do you make of you know?
Speaker 3 (23:37):
And the big beautiful bill, as they describe it, the
ability now for ICE to increase its ranks by aparts
of ten thousand personnel, which would make it the largest
domestic police force anywhere in the world. And increasingly it
seems pretty obvious to anyone paying attention, a political domestic
police force that appears not to be as committed to
(24:00):
an oath to the Constitution, but to the oath to
the President himself. At least how it's played out in
my state. What do you make of what's happening there,
not just with the federalization of the Guard and the
militarization of American cities, but with ice, with border patrol,
masked men disproportionately out in the streets, sidewalks, parks, playgrounds,
(24:24):
in and around churches, schools, courthouses.
Speaker 2 (24:27):
You know, I'd say two things.
Speaker 1 (24:29):
And again, you know, I think you have, better than
anybody else, called out the moral consequences of a private
police force loyal to the president and not necessarily the
rule of law doing violence to our neighbors without regard
(24:50):
on most days as to whether those neighbors.
Speaker 2 (24:52):
Have committed a crime or not.
Speaker 1 (24:55):
But you know, one, I think it's it's really important
to understand that this isn't popular and Democrats, you know,
have been really reluctant to talk about anything connected to immigration. Yeah,
I think the Democratic Party should get, you know, stronger
on a message of a secure border. But I also
(25:16):
think that, you know, folks really don't like what's happening now,
and we don't appear to folks as a legitimate opposition
if we're remaining silent. So folks want a secure border,
but they also don't want ICE going after immigrants who are,
you know, basically playing by the rules and having committed
(25:36):
no violent offenses. So I think that that's really really
important to understand that we've got to talk about what's
happening and that the people will be will be with us.
Speaker 3 (25:48):
Do you think, I mean one of the things that
I appreciate, many things that I appreciate about you, is
your willingness to do your own forensics, your own analysis
on went right wrong in the last election, but you
broad in it. You wrote a one I think the
best maybe the best piece quite literally that I've read,
(26:10):
looking back at where our party is, looking at the
present and arguing for a different future. Is your sense
that our party is finance footing again now? I mean,
on the basis we could talk a little bit more,
maybe unpacked, maybe you can illuminate the viewers and listeners
about what you argued is the challenge for our party.
(26:33):
But is your sense now that we are back on
firmer footing than when you wrote that piece a number
of months ago. Do you feel like our party is
in better shape or worse shape?
Speaker 2 (26:44):
Are we finding our voice?
Speaker 3 (26:45):
Is this shut down in a perverse sense, helpful in
terms of just organizing that voice and a clarity of
what's at stake.
Speaker 1 (26:52):
All right, well, I'm going to turn that question back
around on you too. But I mean, the polling would
not tell you that our party is in good shape today.
Speaker 2 (26:58):
We are historically.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
Unpopular and part of that is just, you know, people
expressing their frustration about Trump's lawlessness through their indictment of
the opposition that they would hope could have arrested.
Speaker 2 (27:11):
More of it.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
But yeah, he's giving us an opportunity, right, he has
been exposed as a fake populist. Right he is simply
operationalizing government to steal from poor people, cut their health
care to it enrich himself. And so that really commands
us to try to figure out why we've lost so
many votes amongst poor people in this country because they're
(27:34):
now questioning whether this guy is actually righteous, whether this
guy actually is looking out for them. But they're not
ready to vote for Democrats. And that's for a couple
of reasons. Hey, they think we're just as corrupt as
Republicans are. And so until we get more forceful in
the way that we talk about how we would reform
government if we were back in charge, like maybe a
(27:56):
constitutional amendment to ban private money, corporate money on us
money from campaigns. They're just going to sort of think
that we're all the same stripe. And then two, you know,
they perceive us Democrats often to be pretty judgmental about
them if they don't line up with us on all
of our social and cultural priorities. And so you know,
(28:21):
I've gotten in some hot water amongst our friends because
I've said, listen, I think we should be a party
who has a tent pole of unrigging our economy and
unrigging our democracy, and then we should try to let
into that coalition people who might not agree with us
on all of the hot button issues, even guns. That
doesn't mean I stopped fighting any harder for those things.
(28:42):
I just think we can win a lot more elections
if we were perceived as being, as I said, a
little less overtly judgmental of people who don't believe in
everything that you know, me or Gavin Newsom or Kamala
Harris believes. And let's just open up the aperture a
little bit to who we invite in, and we might
(29:02):
find ourselves winning more elections and being able to get
a lot of good stuff done for the country.
Speaker 3 (29:07):
So is your sense that we're coming to our senses
in that respect or is it still so situational as
you opened up about Trump and trump Ism and sort
of the crisis at hand in this moment, and that
we're still sort of in this fight or flight in
terms of playing defense right now before we then get
back dust off and really talk about that positive alternative
(29:29):
to Trump and trump Ism that is more inclusive, that
broadens our appeal to more people.
Speaker 2 (29:35):
Yeah, I think it's.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Probably the former. I think we are right now seized
with this fight. And of course it doesn't really matter
if we correct from a policy or messaging standpoint if
we don't have an election in twenty twenty six or
we don't have a free and fair election. So it
is kind of essential at least in twenty twenty five
(29:58):
for us to make sure that we lose our democracy
within this twelve month period of time. But I think
we could probably do a better job of walking and
chewing gum at the same time. I don't know, Gavin,
it's just to me, you know, we became a party
that kind of became addicted to incrementalism. You know, we
thought that these little adjustments on the margins of the
market could you know, make people's lives better. I just
(30:21):
want us to be for big ideas again, ideas that
are as big as the solutions that people face. And again,
in the way that you're attacking this threat to democracy,
you've kind of modeled a belief in big ideas. And
Trump has big ideas. They're racist, they're responsible, divisive ideas.
The Democratic Party is going to have to have some
(30:42):
bigger ideas if we want to convince people that we
know how hard their lives are.
Speaker 2 (30:46):
I can't agree with you more.
Speaker 3 (30:47):
I mean those talk about trend lines that have become headlines.
You've got an economy for decades that hasn't been working
for folks. And one of the areas that I admire
you're so focused on as young people, and this notion
of loneliness and isolation and underscorings for the economic trend
lines that are now finally being recognized. As a thirty
(31:08):
year old today living is doing worse than his parents,
which is the first time in US history that's ever
been the case. And the more time I spend online,
more time I spent offline, more time I spend with
my own kids.
Speaker 2 (31:22):
You know, I can appreciate this, this sort of that's.
Speaker 3 (31:27):
Almost a desperation that I will never ever afford the
home I'm growing up in, or even imagine even being
able to pay rent, even if I have two or
three roommates, or be able to continue to afford the
quality of life that you or my parents are enjoying.
And so I think this notion of moving away from
incrementalism is important, But I also want to unpack this
(31:48):
notion of isolationism and this notion that increasingly people are
sort of understanding and unpacking again. You've written a lot
about it. Maybe you can illuminate us to your thoughts
in that respect.
Speaker 1 (32:00):
I appreciate it because you know, there's a there's a
radical change happening in America today, and it does explain
a lot of our incivility and a lot of our
political anchor. We've gone through really a period of great
social withdrawal. And it's not just the pandemic. It really
dates to, you know, the moment those smartphones got dumped
(32:21):
in our pockets. Today, the average adult spends half as
much time every week with friends and family in person
than they did just thirty years ago. The fall up
and socialization has been even more severe for our kids.
They're in some instances spending sixty seventy percent less time
(32:43):
in in person communion than they were just generations ago.
You know, you have to work longer hours now to
be able to make ends meet, so there's less leisure
time available for you. We have a a isolation and
loneliness epidemic in this country, and you know, the Surgeon
(33:04):
General under Biden talked about you know how that has
health consequences. You're more likely to have heart disease, dementia
if you're spending more time alone. But it has practical
considerations for our politics. I mean, I bet you a
lot of those people who were riding at the Capitol
on January sixth were pretty lonely people that came to
believe these conspiracy theories about Democrats because they were first
sad about their loneliness, and then they were angry about
(33:26):
it and they wanted to.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
Take it out on somebody.
Speaker 1 (33:28):
So, you know, I just think that you know, the
in that founding document, it says that government is supposed
to guarantee the right to pursue happiness and happiness is rooted, yeah,
in your career, but mostly in your relationships, mostly in
you know, how connected you feel to your community. So
I would love a conversation about how we kind of
unwind this cycle of social withdrawal. And I think we
(33:51):
should start with our kids. You and I am raising
kids in this age of smartphones. You and I talked
about it last time we saw each other in person.
I remember you having done a better job than I
have and my kid's mom has in keeping our kids
away from that technology. But you know, you could just
start by restricting the access kids after social media, giving
(34:12):
them a chance at meeting each other more often, and
then maybe that would spin them into healthier adults. I
just think it's a real important and unifying conversation because
like right and left, don't feel differently about the poison
that's being handed to our kids. They want us to
step up and do something.
Speaker 3 (34:30):
I completely concurrent in terms of just the universality of
the concerns and the consideration of how we can I mean,
this is about communitarianism. It's not about political party. It's
about our shared experience, shared humanity. And I think this
explains more things and more ways on more days in
terms of our politics and unpacking that is critical and
(34:51):
the interest of trying to sort of unpack more issues
and distill in a very short period of time. I
want to unpack a little bit about your reference a
moment that very much is in line with what we
were just talking and you mentioned media and passing. You
obviously have tried to meet the moment with the Nope Act,
which I want to talk about in a second, in
(35:12):
relationship to what happened with Jimmy Kimmel. But there's a
lot happening with social media. TikTok now peers to be
transferring hands to American investors disproportionate number that have strong
ties to the Temper administration. We've seen what's happened with
Paramount deal and obviously new announcement to the new Barry
(35:35):
Weise who's going to be running CBS, and just a
shift now consolidation into hands of fewer and fewer people.
Seems like more oversight, or at least more settlements that
imply more oversight, including with YouTube that's sending twenty two
million dollars of a twenty four and a half million
(35:55):
dollars settlement to build a new ballroom that is not,
by the way, be packed it by the government shut
down the construction there. What's your what's your sense of
what's happening the media landscape in this.
Speaker 2 (36:07):
Well that doesn't sound too good when you, you know,
lay it out that way. Leading question here.
Speaker 1 (36:13):
Well, I mean, like you know this, you know, totalitarianism
and monopoly go hand in hand. You know, it's really
important to you know, somebody that's seeking to contract the
space for descents to you know, be able to pull
the levers of media control. And it's really really worrying
that increasingly there's a really small number of people in
(36:35):
this country who control the platforms upon which we communicate.
Speaker 2 (36:41):
The algorithms really matter there.
Speaker 1 (36:44):
And control the sources of news that we all consume.
You mentioned this, You know this one company that's essentially
controlled by the Ellison family. They're very very close to
Donald Trump. They just bought up Paramount, which on CBS
and immediately installed Arry Wise, right leaning commentator in charge
(37:06):
of the news.
Speaker 2 (37:07):
They now are.
Speaker 1 (37:07):
Looking to buy an even bigger media company that includes CNN.
They may have control of TikTok. I mean, this is
one family now that could have CBS, CNN, TikTok, and
you saw what happened to Kimmel when the state starts
to use its regulatory power to act on small and
(37:28):
medium sized actors and say, if you want to keep
your license or you want to ever get a merger approved,
you've got to listen to us in terms of who
can speak and who can't speak. Again, this is you know,
what's been happening in Hungary over the past twenty years,
is that the government just starts to cut deals with
very rich people. Will let you take ownership over this
(37:50):
media company and will make you We'll let you make
a lot of money off of it, but you have
to tilt the coverage towards us. And it's pretty clear
and in fact, pretty brazen and transparent that that's what
Trump is time to do. So you know, we've got to,
you know, speak up about that. But we also have
to tell people that if you put Democrats in charge,
(38:11):
we're going to do something about these media monopolies. I
think that's actually pretty popular because I think folks out
there don't like the fact that, you know, the news
is being controlled by a small handful of individuals and
companies in this country.
Speaker 3 (38:24):
So after what occurred with Jimmy Kimmel and the SCC
and concerns. You introduced an actual strategy to respond to that,
not just rhetoric, but actual legislative plan referred to and
you're of an act. There's the NOPE Act. Unpack that.
What's the N and O and P and E stand for?
Speaker 1 (38:45):
Well, you know, it is important also to just remember that,
you know, Kimmel's back on the air, right, and it's
another demonstration of you know, our power. In that case,
it was commercial power that we you know, used our
powers consumers to say that Disney listens are going to
be consequences to you if you essentially engaged in Trump's
censorship regime. And we can do that again through our
(39:08):
commercial power. But we also have that same power politically.
So you know, the notepack is, you know, is a
is a bill about banning political prosecutions. So we just
set up a whole new set of common sense defenses
that individuals would have in court if they ever got
(39:29):
prosecuted for free speech. Now it's illegal to arrest somebody
just because they're protesting the government, but that hasn't stopped
Trump from doing it.
Speaker 2 (39:38):
I don't remember if it.
Speaker 1 (39:39):
Was Stalin or some other famous totalitarian and once you
know said show me the person and I'll.
Speaker 2 (39:45):
Find you the crime.
Speaker 1 (39:47):
Right like you know, you can dig up something somebody
has done and alleged it is a crime, even though
your underlying motivation is really to punish their speech. What
this bill does is just set up a number of
defenses you raise in court if you believe you're being
persecuted for speech, and allows you to ultimately collect attorneys
fees and have repercussions against the charging agent if it
(40:09):
turns out that you were unconstitutionally pursued for your political activity.
Speaker 2 (40:15):
So listen, I don't I don't have any.
Speaker 1 (40:17):
Illusions that that bill is going to pass in a
Republican Congress. But it's just another way for us to
raise for folks the specter of what they're doing.
Speaker 3 (40:28):
So let's in finishing up here, I want to sort
of go back to the beginning and just you know,
you made the point on multiple occasions, including the reference
to how people really use their voice and express their
disdain for what occurred and put a lot of pressure
on Disney and Kimmel getting back on air in no
large part was because of people exercising their free speech
(40:52):
and pushing back. You mentioned the No King's rally on
October eighteenth. You mentioned as well Indivisible and other organizations
you've been supporting, and we're grateful and you've been champion
for so many of these, uh, these these sort of democratic,
small de organizations all across this country. What you know,
where where do you see things going as we map
(41:13):
out twenty twenty six? I mean, uh, there, it's pretty
clear Trump would have made those phone calls, first one
being to Greg Abbott said he's entitled to five seats
in Texas, and those subsequent phone calls. So you saw
that poor Indiana governor who said I had no choice
and he publicly said it out loud because he would
take my money. Just think about that, I mean, President
(41:34):
saying he's entitled to five seats. And I don't think
enough people paid attention to what the governor of Indiana
said of why he's moving with redistricting just under just
the auspices of being threatened with government money. What do
you make of where we are and where we'll be
this time next year in terms of our prospects not
(41:57):
only for the House representatives but the United States Senate
and how important are these organizing groups, the No King's
rally and the momentum that we need to build in
terms of sharing our voice between now and then in
terms of getting back into control and power.
Speaker 1 (42:15):
Well, you know, you mentioned you know before, maybe my
my over optimism about our ability to get Republicans to
do the right thing on the shutdown.
Speaker 2 (42:25):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (42:25):
My feeling is that, you know, people like you and
me kind of have to be absurd optimists, you know,
sticking this business for as long as we have. But
I'm optimistic about a our ability to defend democracy and
our ability to win next November.
Speaker 2 (42:40):
Yeah, I think a lot of it has to.
Speaker 1 (42:41):
Do with the success of your effort and the success
of other states' efforts to try to balance out the
harm that they're doing in places like Texas and Indiana.
But you know, there's this really interesting study that was
done some years ago that looked at democracies that were crumbling,
right that we're being challenged by an elected leader who
you know, essentially wanted to stay in power forever.
Speaker 2 (43:03):
And what they found.
Speaker 1 (43:04):
But the study found is that there's kind of a
magic number, a magic number of citizens that once they
hit the street, end up just putting the sand in
the gears of that to sent away from the democracy.
The number is sort of two to three percent of
the people. I think on October eighteenth, we're going to
maybe see record numbers of people all around this country
standing up and speaking out. And that will, you know,
(43:26):
cause just a little bit of concern amongst Republicans who think, well,
maybe this isn't as strong a bet as I thought.
You know, maybe I am going to lose my seat
if I continue to endorse this corruption. Maybe that'll give
a little bit more confidence to some corporate CEO or
some leader of a school or a law firm out
there to say no to the attempts at bullying. So
(43:47):
I just think it's still in our hands. History tells
us that when the people stand up, something magical happens,
whether it's fear on the other side, courage to allies
who have been sitting on the sideline, We still have
the ability to save this thing. And again, you know, all,
you know, all credit to what you are doing in California,
(44:09):
which in many ways is the center of our you know,
national effort to resist. Whether it was what you did
to raise issue with the deployment of federal troops, what
you've done to stand up to his uses of spending
power to bully states into submission or Prop fifty. I
think we'll have a big turnout on the eighteenth.
Speaker 2 (44:31):
I think we'll.
Speaker 1 (44:31):
Continue to grow indivisible and move on in local groups,
and in the end, I think we'll be in a
strong position. A Senate's hard next November, no doubt about it.
Like if you had an outcome where we won the
House and we didn't win the Senate, that that wouldn't
you know, spell doom for democracy.
Speaker 2 (44:46):
That would still be a good day.
Speaker 1 (44:48):
But you know, if it's appropleer ratings stayed out in
the low thirties, mid thirties, we got a chance to,
you know, win places like Texas, flip a couple of
seats that people maybe weren't expecting in the Senate and
maybe surprise folks.
Speaker 3 (45:03):
Love to hear that optimism, and it's a reminder, you know,
Justice brand I said it better than any of us.
In a democracy, the most important office is office of citizen.
This notion of act of not inert citizenship. And we
saw that the last big protests a few months back,
and I hope on October eighteenth, everybody is hearing Senator
Murphy loud and clear, the opportunity to really, you know,
(45:26):
not just show up for ourselves, but show up for
each other, show up for our founding fathers. They didn't
live and die to watch two hundred and forty nine
years of these enduring principles of you know, co equal
branches of government, popular sovereignty, the rule of law be
replaced by, as we've said, the rule of don And
(45:46):
so I'm grateful Center for all your leadership, and I
encourage everybody listening watching. I don't remember under what was
it a blog that you wrote yourself? Was it published
in some fancy magazine?
Speaker 1 (46:01):
But I wrote I wrote something longer. I think it
was for I don't remember what it was American Prospect.
I think that's where it was. I talked about it. Yeah,
google it sort of. There was a realignment of America,
and how you know, there's there's a lot of folks
out there who want to break out of Trump's camp,
but need the Democratic Party to feel a little bit
(46:22):
more sincere and a little bit more robust in the
way that we attack concentrated power.
Speaker 2 (46:27):
So hopefully I'm right. It was.
Speaker 3 (46:30):
It was a long piece and it deserved to be long,
and it was every word was important. And I can't
impress upon people more the importance of taking a look
at it because you brought in the aperture and you
really looked at our party more broadly and connected to
cultural issues, more larger societal issues, not just tactical or
situational issues. And again I I I'll end as I began.
(46:54):
One of the brightest lights in the Democratic Party. Guy
shows up every single day online, offline. Senator Chris Murphy,
thanks for being with us.
Speaker 2 (47:02):
You're my hero man. Thanks a lot, Thank you, brother,
So salitarianism and monopoly go in and don't make the
healthcare system any worse, don't jack up premiums on people
by seventy five percent, and.
Speaker 2 (00:07):
Don't act lawlessly.
Speaker 1 (00:08):
History tells us that when the people stand up, something
magical happens.
Speaker 3 (00:12):
Well, I don't need to remind everybody that the government
is shut down, but we are not shut out from
getting a deeper understanding of what's going on in Washington, DC,
because we have one of the most prominent democratic voices,
someone who has been a fierce defender of democracy and
free speech, who is one of the leaders in the
resistance against Trump and trump Ism, that can unpack and
(00:36):
unveil what's going on with healthcare in this country, what's
going on in terms of negotiation with the government shut down,
but also broad in the aperture to what's going on
in American cities with the increasing militarization with our National Guard,
and what's happening to the state of our democracy. This
(00:59):
is Gavin Newson. This is Senator Chris Murphy. Senator Murphy,
it's great that you took the time to be with
us today. I continue to make this point behind your
back anytime I'm asked, they said, who do you admire
out there in the Democratic Party? Who from your perspective,
particularly in Washington, TC stands out And every single time
(01:22):
first name comes out of my mouth is you, sir.
And so I'm grateful for this opportunity to check in
and check up on what's going on in this country,
including just what happened as we're taping this. Just an
hour or so ago Pam Bondy, the Attorney General of
the United States, at an oversight hearing that sounded more
(01:43):
like cross examination coming from Pam Bondy doing op research
on Democratic senators.
Speaker 1 (01:49):
So what was your reflection of that, Well, Governor, awesome
to be with you, man, The compliment is turned straight
back around.
Speaker 2 (01:57):
What you're doing out in California is.
Speaker 1 (01:59):
Absolutely a central People need to feel like we are powerful,
not powerless right now, and you're delivering people that sensation
that there's still things we can do to save our democracy. Yeah,
I mean I watched some clips of that hearing. You know,
she acts like, you know, somebody who works for a
guy who believes he's a king, right it, believes that
they're accountable to no one. She clearly showed zero deference
(02:22):
for the United States Congress and Senate. That's probably understandable
given her combative boss and how you know what she
wants folks out there making news and creating viral clips.
But you know, it just is representative of the way
the entire administration operates. They're not bound by the law,
they're not bound by the Constitution. They don't believe they're
(02:44):
accountable to the people. They certainly don't believe they're accountable
to the Senate. And I think that's wearing thin on folks.
You know, eighty percent of Americans now say that we're
in the middle of a political crisis. More than fifty
percent of the country is worried about losing their right
to free.
Speaker 2 (02:59):
Speech and the show.
Speaker 1 (03:00):
So I don't think she does her boss any favors by,
you know, acting so childish representing the Department of Justice
in front of the United States Senate. I don't know
if you think differently.
Speaker 3 (03:13):
It's interesting, and you know, I want to unpack that
because I think the point you're making is an important
point about how quote unquote unpopular so many of the positions,
not just the president's overall popularity itself, but a lot
of the positions he has been promoting, including members of
his own administration. But I wonder if just in the
administration of oversight, did you reflect on that and reflect
(03:35):
on the fact that Democrats may need to change their
tactics in terms of how they even begin to, you know,
prepare for subsequent oversight hearings.
Speaker 1 (03:46):
Yeah, I mean, these hearings are becoming jokes because she's
not even attempting to answer these questions. You know, when
we send basic oversight letters to these agencies to ask
questions about how they're spending money, they never ever respond.
And so yeah, I do think you need to understand
(04:07):
that right now, they perceive these hearings to be reality
TV shows, and you're, unfortunately, whether you like it or not,
going to have to approach the hearings in that way.
But I also think Governor, you know that we've got
to make clear that the oversight here, especially when it
comes to the illegality, is permanent, right because someday Democrats
(04:29):
are going to be back in charge of the House
and the Senate. Someday we're going to have the power
of subpoenas. Someday there's going to be people in the
Department of Justice who actually want to administer the law
on its face, and so I just think we're going
to need to say to these folks and save your records,
because if any of you have committed actual, real illegality,
(04:51):
you know you are ultimately going to have to be
held accountable for that, either by being hauled before Congress
and be forced to swim in and tell the truth
and be held accountable for perjury, or before a court
of laws. So the oversight is going to be much
more real and much more forceful when Democrats are back
(05:11):
in charge.
Speaker 2 (05:13):
And we'll get to getting back in charge.
Speaker 3 (05:15):
Talk a little bit about redistricting in twenty twenty six,
particularly as it relates to not just the Senate but
obviously the House. But first I want to sort of
paint the picture of where we are today where now
this government shut down. We haven't broken any records, but
were not necessarily break in any new ground in terms
of breakthroughs based upon at least what I'm reading and
(05:37):
understanding and hearing, as it relates to the prospects of
a deal, where you think things stand at this stage,
and how do you think we have positioned ourselves the
Democratic Party, and how do you think we get out
on the other side.
Speaker 1 (05:52):
Well, I mean, I think it's first of all important
to understand that Trump is rooting for a shutdown, right
because he does believe that he has these extraordinary powers.
He's come to believe that those powers get bigger in
a shutdown. That's not true. He also roots for chaos,
and the fact of the matter is there's more chaos
when the government is shut down. Cruelty is the point
(06:15):
to this administration, and things get crueler when head start
centers don't open and federal employees don't get their paycheck.
But what Democrats' priorities are here are pretty damn reasonable.
Speaker 2 (06:30):
What are we asking for.
Speaker 1 (06:31):
We're saying, listen, the healthcare system isn't fair and it's
a mess. We just don't want it to get worse
this fall, when premiums are scheduled to increase on people
who have Affordable Care Act plans by seventy one hundred percent.
So let's just make sure that those premium increases don't
go into effect. And then second, let's make sure that
if we write a budget that says you have to
(06:53):
spend money in all fifty states, the president is actually
required to spend money in all fifty states instead of
not spending money in places like California, in New York
and Connecticut that are represented by Democrats and spending money
in states represented by Republicans. So I mean our asks
are pretty minimalist. Just don't make the healthcare system any worse,
don't jack up premiums on people by seventy five percent,
and don't act lawlessly. If we get those two things
(07:17):
included in this budget, then I think you're going to
see democratic votes, and I think increasingly the American publicers
are beginning to see that, you know, what we're asking
for is pretty damn popular and not terribly piggish.
Speaker 3 (07:30):
And it seems to have been reflected in the president's
own comments, where it seemed at least politically attuned to
the popularity of healthcare and the imperative to actually figure
this out, suggesting that he's quote unquote a Republican but
likes healthcare and thinks he can quote unquote make a deal,
but doesn't seem to me there's any substantive conversations, or
(07:52):
are there substantive conversations being held?
Speaker 1 (07:55):
There are not, and the clearest evidence of how unseerious
Republicans are about negotiating is the fact that they're not here,
so the House of Representatives is not in session. This
is the third week that they've been on kind of
an unscheduled recess. Part of that is that they don't
really want to negotiate away out of the shutdown. Part
(08:15):
of that we can talk about it is that they're
about to vote on the Epstein resolution, and a minute
they come back into session, a new Democrat will be
sworn in, giving them the magic number of votes on
a resolution that would force a debate and vote on
the Epstein resolution. But no, there are no real negotiations
(08:36):
happening right now. But you know, those premium increases are
getting closer and closer and closer, And as more Americans
get their notices that they're about to see a five thousand,
ten thousand dollars increase in premiums, the pressure is going
to mount on Republicans to come to the table and
reopen the government while also making sure that people don't
(08:56):
get hurt from a healthcare perspective. And I mean, you
know the real world consequences yere. We're not talking about numbers.
This isn't about politics. This is you know, people who
are going to have to make a really hard decision
about whether to keep their healthcare or let it lapse
and potentially based bankruptcy, or pay the increased premium and
just you know, have their kids go without lunch three
(09:16):
days a week, or just not have Christmas presents under
the tree this winter. I mean, their real consequences to
these premium spiking for middle class families all across the country.
Speaker 2 (09:28):
Yeah, I think.
Speaker 3 (09:28):
I mean the magnitude of those those premium increases are
pretty jaw dropping. Did we just put out in California, which,
of course we provide more coverage than any other state
just by the dairy nature and size and scope and
scale of our state. But we have very familiar here
on the exchange in California what they call the Bronze Plan,
which is the Middle Plan for folks and anthem. And
(09:50):
you got premiums that will go from three hundred and
seven dollars to nine hundred and sixty four dollars a month.
I mean, it's just so it's on average, we talk
about the agurate, but people will see tripling in some
cases up to three hundred and eighty eight percent and
an average of ninety seven percent of those increases, and
we expect six hundred thousand people to lose insurance because
they can't afford it in California, and I know we're
(10:13):
talking four plus million across the United States. So I
appreciate the painting of that picture with clarity and sticking
to two easy issues to understand. Congressionally approved appropriations. Congress
the purse, here's where money. We both approved the legislative
and executive branch where it needs to go. And the
(10:34):
President shouldn't utilaterally change that course, that commitment, that direction
and healthcare. But I'm curious if I could just step
back center what was without breaking confidence. But I'm curious
the Democratic Caucus the determination last time not to move
forward with the government shut down. Lessons learned the expectation
(10:59):
that you needed to prepare for this moment, particularly with
someone as you suggest, it was more interesting in golfing
before the shutdown, and obviously had no interest in meeting
with the leaders because he canceled that first meeting and
then in that last meeting just trolled those leaders in
the Oval Office with a twenty twenty eight Trump Patty
was never serious to your point about negotiating, but knowing
(11:20):
that was what was the journey since the last time,
we decided to continue to allow government to stay open
to the determination this time to get a little bit
tougher in terms of the approach.
Speaker 1 (11:32):
Yeah, you know, we have so few moments of leverage,
moments where we have power as a minority. Right Republicans,
whether we like it or not, they run the White House,
the House, and the Senate, and so when they do
need our votes, I mean, it's really our moral responsibility
on behalf of the people we represent to stand up
for things we believe, you know, not to you know,
(11:55):
be pollyannish about what we're ultimately going to get, but
to stand up for a few things that will help people.
You know, I disagreed with the decision backing in the
fall to vote for a budget that was essentially written
only by Republicans that didn't solve any of the problems
that they.
Speaker 2 (12:12):
Were in the midst of creating.
Speaker 1 (12:14):
But you know, a few things are different that I think,
you know, allows Democrats to be right now really united
around using our leverage.
Speaker 2 (12:22):
You know.
Speaker 1 (12:23):
One, you know, people see Trump I think more clearly
now than they did back then. As approval ratings are
you know, ten points lower too. The pain is you know,
more real now that that big beautiful bill has passed.
Premiums are about to go up on millions of Americans.
So the pain is acute right now in a way
that maybe it wasn't in March. And then, you know,
(12:44):
back in March, I think there were a lot of
folks who were worried about his attacks on democracy. But
maybe we're sort of hoping for the best case. Now
they see that we are in the middle of a
totalitarian takeover. If it's not arrested, if it's not stopped,
they are trying to rig the rules, and thank goodness
for you and what you're doing in California, they are
trying to you know, create a state run media.
Speaker 2 (13:06):
They are trying to use.
Speaker 1 (13:07):
The Department of Justice to suppress dissent and lock up
their critics. So you know, that level of alarm is
much higher. And I just think, you know, it's not
just Democrats who want us to fight and draw a line.
You know, it's a big part of the middle of
the country too. So the demand for us to show power,
I just think is a lot more amplified today that
(13:30):
it was back in the Spring, which is also why
so many people all around this country, left, middle, and
center are cheering what you're doing to show that we
are not powerless against his efforts to try to rig
the rules.
Speaker 3 (13:45):
So where do you see? I mean, is this we
look at another week, two month? I mean, you're going
to be back at this in seven, six and a
half weeks or six weeks. Isn't there another this sort
of date with destiny in terms of just extending this
narrative even be I know we're talking about this continuing
resolution seven weeks, but that just gets us to another
point where we're going to have another potential shut down.
(14:07):
I mean, is this the bond markets that ultimately we're
going to determine that we're going to break this chill?
Is it the stock market that ultimately is going to
force everybody to come to the table.
Speaker 2 (14:19):
What's your gut? Yeah?
Speaker 1 (14:22):
I mean my gut is that Republicans are already starting
to sweat a little bit. Something interesting happened just about
ten minutes ago. So we had our lunches today, the
Republicans all huddle for lunch, Democrats all huddle for lunch,
and the Republicans came out of their lunch with a
brand new message, one that we hadn't heard before. Their
(14:43):
message today was, well, Democrats have this big protest coming up.
This is the No King's Rally on October eighteenth, and
so they want to keep the government shut down until
the No King's Rally, which I've never heard from them before.
They clearly knew what they were saying yesterday was working,
and they're scrambling to come up with some new message.
(15:06):
And I think it's just all a sign Governor that
you know, they are feeling the heat because they're getting
more and more calls and emails from constituents who are like, hey,
what the hell are you going to do about this
seventy five percent increase. So my guess, if I had
to put money out of today, is that this isn't
another month that Republicans come to the table sometime soon
(15:27):
and say, listen, help help us, help ourselves. Let's get
rid of these premium increases and listen. That would that
would help a lot of people, and it would show,
you know, for the first time all year that you know,
the Democratic Party has fight and has relevance, and so
I love the optimism.
Speaker 3 (15:44):
I mean, it would be a hell of a victory
for millions and millions of Democrats, Republicans, independence. To your point,
the twenty plus million people that are directly impacted, millions
more indirectly impacted. It's not Democrats or Republicans. These are Americans,
and that would be that would be extraordinary outcome. Let
me ask you just you know, in terms of you've
(16:06):
used the word totalitarian. We started as it relates to
the oversight conversation about use the word Kings, not just
in relationship to the October eighteen NOME King's rally. I mean,
I remember the old Chris Murphy. You know, it was
the bipartisan you're working across the aisle, actually producing real results.
You know, I'm old enough to remember the most significant
(16:27):
at least in my lifetime thirty plus years, safer Communities Act,
the work you did mental health and gun safety in
a bipartisan way.
Speaker 2 (16:35):
But I've noticed much more well, I don't.
Speaker 3 (16:38):
Want to say strident, but I see a Democrat who's
leading the resistance that has more clarity on free speech
in terms of more conviction perhaps and expression around it,
as well as democracy and using language that I understand
that I think is very resident. I'm curious your own
evolution in that respect, and was there a moment that
sort of hit you where you said, I'm going to
(17:00):
I'm going to dial things up a little bit.
Speaker 1 (17:03):
Well, I mean, I appreciate that coming from you, because
we have also watched you at a moment where this
party has been desperate for leadership, bold leadership. We've seen
you step out and frankly take risks, which is which
is what I think this country is desperate for us
(17:23):
to do, to show that we understand the gravity of
this moment and show that we are willing to take
risks on behalf of saving the democracy.
Speaker 2 (17:30):
And probably fifty is a risk, right, not.
Speaker 1 (17:33):
Destined to succeed, but but can and will if we
put our work behind it. So I appreciate you saying that. Yeah, listen,
I just see these guys, and I saw these guys early.
They are not Democrats, small d you know, inside the
Republican Party, they have come to believe over the last
four years that democracy is just not worth it any
(17:54):
longer if it elects Democrats.
Speaker 2 (17:56):
They have come to believe.
Speaker 1 (17:57):
That, you know, our support for multiculturalism and civil rights
and human rights and feminism is you know, an assault
on the very idea of Americanism, and their version of
Americanism is a Christian, white male dominated America. So they
want to get rid of us at any cost, and
(18:19):
if that cost is the erasure or the weakening of democracy,
then they're willing to live with that. So to me,
this is all a plan. I mean, a really well
thought out plan to capture the media, to use the
doj to, which hunts to rig the rules, to change
the facts, as an attempt to just try to suffocate
(18:45):
the opposition so that.
Speaker 2 (18:46):
We don't have enough room to operate.
Speaker 1 (18:47):
And last thing I'll say is that, you know, I
think some people say, well, as long as there's you know,
no cancelation of elections, we're in good shape. Well I
don't think they're canceling the elections. I think they're just
going to, you know, do what they've done in Turkey
and Hungary and other countries like that, where the opposition
party still exists, but they just you know, don't have
enough space to operate, or the rules are are changed,
(19:10):
like the shape of districts, so that even if the
president is wildly unpopular, we can't win. I just see
these guys, and I know it sounds extreme to suggest
that Republicans are actually trying to engineer an erosion or
a destruction of our democracy. And I don't think every
Republican believes that there's still a lot of Republicans in
the Senate who want to protect democracy, but there are some,
(19:33):
there are some real radicals inside the White House who
do have plans to convert America to something different than
liberal democracy. And I just think we have to see
it and understand it so that we recognize, as you are,
you know, how loud our fight has to be.
Speaker 3 (19:48):
How do we overstate or do we understate the influence
of the omb director rest vote.
Speaker 1 (19:56):
I mean, I think he's just you know, one of
many in that White House who who's operationalizing this plan
to you know, constrict the space that the opposition has
to to operate. I mean, what he's doing recently is
another tried and true tactic of would be authoritarians. He's
you know, pausing funding for democratic states, and he's you know,
(20:19):
hoping that Democrats will essentially bend or self censor themselves
so that they get their money turned back on. It
wasn't lost on any of us in the Democratic Caucus
that when they canceled a whole bunch of energy projects.
One of the states that was exempted was Nevada. One
of the two Democratic centers from Nevada voted for Trump's
(20:40):
continuing resolution. So it's a very clear signal. If you
vote with me as a Democrat, your money will continue.
If you don't vote with me, the money's turned off. So,
you know, I just think he's he's playing his role,
But I tend to think that it's more, you know,
Stephen Miller and that crowd out of the White House
that's orchestrating a lot of the day to day operations
(21:00):
of trying.
Speaker 2 (21:02):
To on your mind our democratic norms, and.
Speaker 3 (21:04):
Those democratic norms now include the militarization of American cities.
We saw that obviously firsthand here in California, not just
with the federalization of the National Guard thousands and thousands,
but seven hundred active duty Marines that were sent to
a US city. We said it at the time, this
is a preview of things to come. Obviously Washington, DC
has its own criterion conditions, but clearly takes shape there
(21:28):
and now taking shape in cities large and small, Portland
attempting to militarize those streets with a federal judge appointed
by Trump who correctly has put a pause, but that's
not necessarily the case. And you brought up Stephen Miller
with what he's been able to effectuate in the city
of Chicago.
Speaker 2 (21:50):
Give us your sense of that.
Speaker 3 (21:51):
Trend line that's growing headlined now and where you think
things may go if we're not successful in pushing back.
Speaker 1 (22:00):
Well, it's incredibly dangerous, and I do think you have
to put it in this broader context. You know, at
the same time that they are sending our troops into
Portland and Chicago, they are also getting ready a campaign
to crack down on what they term, you know, far
left terrorist groups, but that list may include Indivisible and
(22:24):
move On, just basic run of the mill progressive activist
groups may all of a sudden be targeted by the
Department of Justice or by the IRS. And so what
they are doing is using the military, using the Department
of Justice, using the IRS to try to convince people
that you're just better off staying on the.
Speaker 2 (22:46):
Sidelines, right.
Speaker 1 (22:47):
I mean, we'd be naive to think that troops in
your city doesn't have an impact on people's willingness to
show up and protest. We'd be naive to think that
the threat of IRS action against you're not for profit
chills your interest to speak truth to power, say what
you think is true about the immorality of this administration.
Speaker 2 (23:06):
So again I.
Speaker 1 (23:08):
Think it's part of this big, broader plan, And again
it just raises the stakes on his budget fight, because yeah,
I want to get people's healthcare saved, but I also
have no moral obligation to vote for a budget that
funds the destruction of our democracy, that funds those operations
at the Department of Defense, at the Department of Revenue,
at the Internal Revenue Service. So that's why this budget
(23:31):
has to be, you know, not just good for our
healthcare system, but good for our democracy too.
Speaker 2 (23:35):
What do you make of you know?
Speaker 3 (23:37):
And the big beautiful bill, as they describe it, the
ability now for ICE to increase its ranks by aparts
of ten thousand personnel, which would make it the largest
domestic police force anywhere in the world. And increasingly it
seems pretty obvious to anyone paying attention, a political domestic
police force that appears not to be as committed to
(24:00):
an oath to the Constitution, but to the oath to
the President himself. At least how it's played out in
my state. What do you make of what's happening there,
not just with the federalization of the Guard and the
militarization of American cities, but with ice, with border patrol,
masked men disproportionately out in the streets, sidewalks, parks, playgrounds,
(24:24):
in and around churches, schools, courthouses.
Speaker 2 (24:27):
You know, I'd say two things.
Speaker 1 (24:29):
And again, you know, I think you have, better than
anybody else, called out the moral consequences of a private
police force loyal to the president and not necessarily the
rule of law doing violence to our neighbors without regard
(24:50):
on most days as to whether those neighbors.
Speaker 2 (24:52):
Have committed a crime or not.
Speaker 1 (24:55):
But you know, one, I think it's it's really important
to understand that this isn't popular and Democrats, you know,
have been really reluctant to talk about anything connected to immigration. Yeah,
I think the Democratic Party should get, you know, stronger
on a message of a secure border. But I also
(25:16):
think that, you know, folks really don't like what's happening now,
and we don't appear to folks as a legitimate opposition
if we're remaining silent. So folks want a secure border,
but they also don't want ICE going after immigrants who are,
you know, basically playing by the rules and having committed
(25:36):
no violent offenses. So I think that that's really really
important to understand that we've got to talk about what's
happening and that the people will be will be with us.
Speaker 3 (25:48):
Do you think, I mean one of the things that
I appreciate, many things that I appreciate about you, is
your willingness to do your own forensics, your own analysis
on went right wrong in the last election, but you
broad in it. You wrote a one I think the
best maybe the best piece quite literally that I've read,
(26:10):
looking back at where our party is, looking at the
present and arguing for a different future. Is your sense
that our party is finance footing again now? I mean,
on the basis we could talk a little bit more,
maybe unpacked, maybe you can illuminate the viewers and listeners
about what you argued is the challenge for our party.
(26:33):
But is your sense now that we are back on
firmer footing than when you wrote that piece a number
of months ago. Do you feel like our party is
in better shape or worse shape?
Speaker 2 (26:44):
Are we finding our voice?
Speaker 3 (26:45):
Is this shut down in a perverse sense, helpful in
terms of just organizing that voice and a clarity of
what's at stake.
Speaker 1 (26:52):
All right, well, I'm going to turn that question back
around on you too. But I mean, the polling would
not tell you that our party is in good shape today.
Speaker 2 (26:58):
We are historically.
Speaker 1 (27:00):
Unpopular and part of that is just, you know, people
expressing their frustration about Trump's lawlessness through their indictment of
the opposition that they would hope could have arrested.
Speaker 2 (27:11):
More of it.
Speaker 1 (27:13):
But yeah, he's giving us an opportunity, right, he has
been exposed as a fake populist. Right he is simply
operationalizing government to steal from poor people, cut their health
care to it enrich himself. And so that really commands
us to try to figure out why we've lost so
many votes amongst poor people in this country because they're
(27:34):
now questioning whether this guy is actually righteous, whether this
guy actually is looking out for them. But they're not
ready to vote for Democrats. And that's for a couple
of reasons. Hey, they think we're just as corrupt as
Republicans are. And so until we get more forceful in
the way that we talk about how we would reform
government if we were back in charge, like maybe a
(27:56):
constitutional amendment to ban private money, corporate money on us
money from campaigns. They're just going to sort of think
that we're all the same stripe. And then two, you know,
they perceive us Democrats often to be pretty judgmental about
them if they don't line up with us on all
of our social and cultural priorities. And so you know,
(28:21):
I've gotten in some hot water amongst our friends because
I've said, listen, I think we should be a party
who has a tent pole of unrigging our economy and
unrigging our democracy, and then we should try to let
into that coalition people who might not agree with us
on all of the hot button issues, even guns. That
doesn't mean I stopped fighting any harder for those things.
(28:42):
I just think we can win a lot more elections
if we were perceived as being, as I said, a
little less overtly judgmental of people who don't believe in
everything that you know, me or Gavin Newsom or Kamala
Harris believes. And let's just open up the aperture a
little bit to who we invite in, and we might
(29:02):
find ourselves winning more elections and being able to get
a lot of good stuff done for the country.
Speaker 3 (29:07):
So is your sense that we're coming to our senses
in that respect or is it still so situational as
you opened up about Trump and trump Ism and sort
of the crisis at hand in this moment, and that
we're still sort of in this fight or flight in
terms of playing defense right now before we then get
back dust off and really talk about that positive alternative
(29:29):
to Trump and trump Ism that is more inclusive, that
broadens our appeal to more people.
Speaker 2 (29:35):
Yeah, I think it's.
Speaker 1 (29:36):
Probably the former. I think we are right now seized
with this fight. And of course it doesn't really matter
if we correct from a policy or messaging standpoint if
we don't have an election in twenty twenty six or
we don't have a free and fair election. So it
is kind of essential at least in twenty twenty five
(29:58):
for us to make sure that we lose our democracy
within this twelve month period of time. But I think
we could probably do a better job of walking and
chewing gum at the same time. I don't know, Gavin,
it's just to me, you know, we became a party
that kind of became addicted to incrementalism. You know, we
thought that these little adjustments on the margins of the
market could you know, make people's lives better. I just
(30:21):
want us to be for big ideas again, ideas that
are as big as the solutions that people face. And again,
in the way that you're attacking this threat to democracy,
you've kind of modeled a belief in big ideas. And
Trump has big ideas. They're racist, they're responsible, divisive ideas.
The Democratic Party is going to have to have some
(30:42):
bigger ideas if we want to convince people that we
know how hard their lives are.
Speaker 2 (30:46):
I can't agree with you more.
Speaker 3 (30:47):
I mean those talk about trend lines that have become headlines.
You've got an economy for decades that hasn't been working
for folks. And one of the areas that I admire
you're so focused on as young people, and this notion
of loneliness and isolation and underscorings for the economic trend
lines that are now finally being recognized. As a thirty
(31:08):
year old today living is doing worse than his parents,
which is the first time in US history that's ever
been the case. And the more time I spend online,
more time I spent offline, more time I spend with
my own kids.
Speaker 2 (31:22):
You know, I can appreciate this, this sort of that's.
Speaker 3 (31:27):
Almost a desperation that I will never ever afford the
home I'm growing up in, or even imagine even being
able to pay rent, even if I have two or
three roommates, or be able to continue to afford the
quality of life that you or my parents are enjoying.
And so I think this notion of moving away from
incrementalism is important, But I also want to unpack this
(31:48):
notion of isolationism and this notion that increasingly people are
sort of understanding and unpacking again. You've written a lot
about it. Maybe you can illuminate us to your thoughts
in that respect.
Speaker 1 (32:00):
I appreciate it because you know, there's a there's a
radical change happening in America today, and it does explain
a lot of our incivility and a lot of our
political anchor. We've gone through really a period of great
social withdrawal. And it's not just the pandemic. It really
dates to, you know, the moment those smartphones got dumped
(32:21):
in our pockets. Today, the average adult spends half as
much time every week with friends and family in person
than they did just thirty years ago. The fall up
and socialization has been even more severe for our kids.
They're in some instances spending sixty seventy percent less time
(32:43):
in in person communion than they were just generations ago.
You know, you have to work longer hours now to
be able to make ends meet, so there's less leisure
time available for you. We have a a isolation and
loneliness epidemic in this country, and you know, the Surgeon
(33:04):
General under Biden talked about you know how that has
health consequences. You're more likely to have heart disease, dementia
if you're spending more time alone. But it has practical
considerations for our politics. I mean, I bet you a
lot of those people who were riding at the Capitol
on January sixth were pretty lonely people that came to
believe these conspiracy theories about Democrats because they were first
sad about their loneliness, and then they were angry about
(33:26):
it and they wanted to.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
Take it out on somebody.
Speaker 1 (33:28):
So, you know, I just think that you know, the
in that founding document, it says that government is supposed
to guarantee the right to pursue happiness and happiness is rooted, yeah,
in your career, but mostly in your relationships, mostly in
you know, how connected you feel to your community. So
I would love a conversation about how we kind of
unwind this cycle of social withdrawal. And I think we
(33:51):
should start with our kids. You and I am raising
kids in this age of smartphones. You and I talked
about it last time we saw each other in person.
I remember you having done a better job than I
have and my kid's mom has in keeping our kids
away from that technology. But you know, you could just
start by restricting the access kids after social media, giving
(34:12):
them a chance at meeting each other more often, and
then maybe that would spin them into healthier adults. I
just think it's a real important and unifying conversation because
like right and left, don't feel differently about the poison
that's being handed to our kids. They want us to
step up and do something.
Speaker 3 (34:30):
I completely concurrent in terms of just the universality of
the concerns and the consideration of how we can I mean,
this is about communitarianism. It's not about political party. It's
about our shared experience, shared humanity. And I think this
explains more things and more ways on more days in
terms of our politics and unpacking that is critical and
(34:51):
the interest of trying to sort of unpack more issues
and distill in a very short period of time. I
want to unpack a little bit about your reference a
moment that very much is in line with what we
were just talking and you mentioned media and passing. You
obviously have tried to meet the moment with the Nope Act,
which I want to talk about in a second, in
(35:12):
relationship to what happened with Jimmy Kimmel. But there's a
lot happening with social media. TikTok now peers to be
transferring hands to American investors disproportionate number that have strong
ties to the Temper administration. We've seen what's happened with
Paramount deal and obviously new announcement to the new Barry
(35:35):
Weise who's going to be running CBS, and just a
shift now consolidation into hands of fewer and fewer people.
Seems like more oversight, or at least more settlements that
imply more oversight, including with YouTube that's sending twenty two
million dollars of a twenty four and a half million
(35:55):
dollars settlement to build a new ballroom that is not,
by the way, be packed it by the government shut
down the construction there. What's your what's your sense of
what's happening the media landscape in this.
Speaker 2 (36:07):
Well that doesn't sound too good when you, you know,
lay it out that way. Leading question here.
Speaker 1 (36:13):
Well, I mean, like you know this, you know, totalitarianism
and monopoly go hand in hand. You know, it's really
important to you know, somebody that's seeking to contract the
space for descents to you know, be able to pull
the levers of media control. And it's really really worrying
that increasingly there's a really small number of people in
(36:35):
this country who control the platforms upon which we communicate.
Speaker 2 (36:41):
The algorithms really matter there.
Speaker 1 (36:44):
And control the sources of news that we all consume.
You mentioned this, You know this one company that's essentially
controlled by the Ellison family. They're very very close to
Donald Trump. They just bought up Paramount, which on CBS
and immediately installed Arry Wise, right leaning commentator in charge
(37:06):
of the news.
Speaker 2 (37:07):
They now are.
Speaker 1 (37:07):
Looking to buy an even bigger media company that includes CNN.
They may have control of TikTok. I mean, this is
one family now that could have CBS, CNN, TikTok, and
you saw what happened to Kimmel when the state starts
to use its regulatory power to act on small and
(37:28):
medium sized actors and say, if you want to keep
your license or you want to ever get a merger approved,
you've got to listen to us in terms of who
can speak and who can't speak. Again, this is you know,
what's been happening in Hungary over the past twenty years,
is that the government just starts to cut deals with
very rich people. Will let you take ownership over this
(37:50):
media company and will make you We'll let you make
a lot of money off of it, but you have
to tilt the coverage towards us. And it's pretty clear
and in fact, pretty brazen and transparent that that's what
Trump is time to do. So you know, we've got to,
you know, speak up about that. But we also have
to tell people that if you put Democrats in charge,
(38:11):
we're going to do something about these media monopolies. I
think that's actually pretty popular because I think folks out
there don't like the fact that, you know, the news
is being controlled by a small handful of individuals and
companies in this country.
Speaker 3 (38:24):
So after what occurred with Jimmy Kimmel and the SCC
and concerns. You introduced an actual strategy to respond to that,
not just rhetoric, but actual legislative plan referred to and
you're of an act. There's the NOPE Act. Unpack that.
What's the N and O and P and E stand for?
Speaker 1 (38:45):
Well, you know, it is important also to just remember that,
you know, Kimmel's back on the air, right, and it's
another demonstration of you know, our power. In that case,
it was commercial power that we you know, used our
powers consumers to say that Disney listens are going to
be consequences to you if you essentially engaged in Trump's
censorship regime. And we can do that again through our
(39:08):
commercial power. But we also have that same power politically.
So you know, the notepack is, you know, is a
is a bill about banning political prosecutions. So we just
set up a whole new set of common sense defenses
that individuals would have in court if they ever got
(39:29):
prosecuted for free speech. Now it's illegal to arrest somebody
just because they're protesting the government, but that hasn't stopped
Trump from doing it.
Speaker 2 (39:38):
I don't remember if it.
Speaker 1 (39:39):
Was Stalin or some other famous totalitarian and once you
know said show me the person and I'll.
Speaker 2 (39:45):
Find you the crime.
Speaker 1 (39:47):
Right like you know, you can dig up something somebody
has done and alleged it is a crime, even though
your underlying motivation is really to punish their speech. What
this bill does is just set up a number of
defenses you raise in court if you believe you're being
persecuted for speech, and allows you to ultimately collect attorneys
fees and have repercussions against the charging agent if it
(40:09):
turns out that you were unconstitutionally pursued for your political activity.
Speaker 2 (40:15):
So listen, I don't I don't have any.
Speaker 1 (40:17):
Illusions that that bill is going to pass in a
Republican Congress. But it's just another way for us to
raise for folks the specter of what they're doing.
Speaker 3 (40:28):
So let's in finishing up here, I want to sort
of go back to the beginning and just you know,
you made the point on multiple occasions, including the reference
to how people really use their voice and express their
disdain for what occurred and put a lot of pressure
on Disney and Kimmel getting back on air in no
large part was because of people exercising their free speech
(40:52):
and pushing back. You mentioned the No King's rally on
October eighteenth. You mentioned as well Indivisible and other organizations
you've been supporting, and we're grateful and you've been champion
for so many of these, uh, these these sort of democratic,
small de organizations all across this country. What you know,
where where do you see things going as we map
(41:13):
out twenty twenty six? I mean, uh, there, it's pretty
clear Trump would have made those phone calls, first one
being to Greg Abbott said he's entitled to five seats
in Texas, and those subsequent phone calls. So you saw
that poor Indiana governor who said I had no choice
and he publicly said it out loud because he would
take my money. Just think about that, I mean, President
(41:34):
saying he's entitled to five seats. And I don't think
enough people paid attention to what the governor of Indiana
said of why he's moving with redistricting just under just
the auspices of being threatened with government money. What do
you make of where we are and where we'll be
this time next year in terms of our prospects not
(41:57):
only for the House representatives but the United States Senate
and how important are these organizing groups, the No King's
rally and the momentum that we need to build in
terms of sharing our voice between now and then in
terms of getting back into control and power.
Speaker 1 (42:15):
Well, you know, you mentioned you know before, maybe my
my over optimism about our ability to get Republicans to
do the right thing on the shutdown.
Speaker 2 (42:25):
I don't know.
Speaker 1 (42:25):
My feeling is that, you know, people like you and
me kind of have to be absurd optimists, you know,
sticking this business for as long as we have. But
I'm optimistic about a our ability to defend democracy and
our ability to win next November.
Speaker 2 (42:40):
Yeah, I think a lot of it has to.
Speaker 1 (42:41):
Do with the success of your effort and the success
of other states' efforts to try to balance out the
harm that they're doing in places like Texas and Indiana.
But you know, there's this really interesting study that was
done some years ago that looked at democracies that were crumbling,
right that we're being challenged by an elected leader who
you know, essentially wanted to stay in power forever.
Speaker 2 (43:03):
And what they found.
Speaker 1 (43:04):
But the study found is that there's kind of a
magic number, a magic number of citizens that once they
hit the street, end up just putting the sand in
the gears of that to sent away from the democracy.
The number is sort of two to three percent of
the people. I think on October eighteenth, we're going to
maybe see record numbers of people all around this country
standing up and speaking out. And that will, you know,
(43:26):
cause just a little bit of concern amongst Republicans who think, well,
maybe this isn't as strong a bet as I thought.
You know, maybe I am going to lose my seat
if I continue to endorse this corruption. Maybe that'll give
a little bit more confidence to some corporate CEO or
some leader of a school or a law firm out
there to say no to the attempts at bullying. So
(43:47):
I just think it's still in our hands. History tells
us that when the people stand up, something magical happens,
whether it's fear on the other side, courage to allies
who have been sitting on the sideline, We still have
the ability to save this thing. And again, you know, all,
you know, all credit to what you are doing in California,
(44:09):
which in many ways is the center of our you know,
national effort to resist. Whether it was what you did
to raise issue with the deployment of federal troops, what
you've done to stand up to his uses of spending
power to bully states into submission or Prop fifty. I
think we'll have a big turnout on the eighteenth.
Speaker 2 (44:31):
I think we'll.
Speaker 1 (44:31):
Continue to grow indivisible and move on in local groups,
and in the end, I think we'll be in a
strong position. A Senate's hard next November, no doubt about it.
Like if you had an outcome where we won the
House and we didn't win the Senate, that that wouldn't
you know, spell doom for democracy.
Speaker 2 (44:46):
That would still be a good day.
Speaker 1 (44:48):
But you know, if it's appropleer ratings stayed out in
the low thirties, mid thirties, we got a chance to,
you know, win places like Texas, flip a couple of
seats that people maybe weren't expecting in the Senate and
maybe surprise folks.
Speaker 3 (45:03):
Love to hear that optimism, and it's a reminder, you know,
Justice brand I said it better than any of us.
In a democracy, the most important office is office of citizen.
This notion of act of not inert citizenship. And we
saw that the last big protests a few months back,
and I hope on October eighteenth, everybody is hearing Senator
Murphy loud and clear, the opportunity to really, you know,
(45:26):
not just show up for ourselves, but show up for
each other, show up for our founding fathers. They didn't
live and die to watch two hundred and forty nine
years of these enduring principles of you know, co equal
branches of government, popular sovereignty, the rule of law be
replaced by, as we've said, the rule of don And
(45:46):
so I'm grateful Center for all your leadership, and I
encourage everybody listening watching. I don't remember under what was
it a blog that you wrote yourself? Was it published
in some fancy magazine?
Speaker 1 (46:01):
But I wrote I wrote something longer. I think it
was for I don't remember what it was American Prospect.
I think that's where it was. I talked about it. Yeah,
google it sort of. There was a realignment of America,
and how you know, there's there's a lot of folks
out there who want to break out of Trump's camp,
but need the Democratic Party to feel a little bit
(46:22):
more sincere and a little bit more robust in the
way that we attack concentrated power.
Speaker 2 (46:27):
So hopefully I'm right. It was.
Speaker 3 (46:30):
It was a long piece and it deserved to be long,
and it was every word was important. And I can't
impress upon people more the importance of taking a look
at it because you brought in the aperture and you
really looked at our party more broadly and connected to
cultural issues, more larger societal issues, not just tactical or
situational issues. And again I I I'll end as I began.
(46:54):
One of the brightest lights in the Democratic Party. Guy
shows up every single day online, offline. Senator Chris Murphy,
thanks for being with us.
Speaker 2 (47:02):
You're my hero man. Thanks a lot, Thank you, brother,
Host
Gavin Newsom
Popular Podcasts
Las Culturistas with Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang
Ding dong! Join your culture consultants, Matt Rogers and Bowen Yang, on an unforgettable journey into the beating heart of CULTURE. Alongside sizzling special guests, they GET INTO the hottest pop-culture moments of the day and the formative cultural experiences that turned them into Culturistas. Produced by the Big Money Players Network and iHeartRadio.
The Joe Rogan Experience
The official podcast of comedian Joe Rogan.
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.