May 9, 2026 • 40 mins
In this episode of the News Items podcast, John Ellis sits down with Taegan Goddard, the founder of Political Wire, for a sprawling conversation about the chaos engine that is modern American politics. Goddard traces the unlikely origins of Political Wire, from downloading newspaper front pages at 4 a.m. on a commuter train, to building one of the internet’s earliest and most influential political blogs. From there, the discussion turns to Trump’s collapsing approval numbers, Democratic momentum heading into the midterms, and the Senate races that could decide control of Washington. They dissect everything from AI data-center revolts in rural America to the future of MAGA after Trump, while gaming out whether figures like Gavin Newsom, JD Vance, or a dark horse nobody sees coming will dominate 2028. It’s equal parts campaign autopsy, media criticism, and insider shop talk from two veteran political obsessives.
Hosted by John Ellis
Listen
Watch
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
SPEAKER_00 (00:00):
Hello and welcome back to the News Items Podcast.
I'm John Ellis.
I'm the founder and editor oftwo Substack newsletters.
One is called News Items, theother is called Political News
Items, and you can find themboth at news-items.com.
My guest today is Tegan Goddard.
Tagan is the founder and editorof Political Wire.
(00:23):
You can find that atpoliticalwire.com.
It's one of the very best andmost influential political
websites in the United States,and it updates continuously
throughout the day.
And Tegan, thank you very muchfor joining us.
SPEAKER_01 (00:38):
Thanks for having me, John.
I'm a big fan and a longtimereader of news items, as you
know.
SPEAKER_00 (00:43):
Thank you.
So it's an interesting story.
We you were like an investmentbanker or something, right?
SPEAKER_01 (00:49):
I worked, I worked in the asset management field,
but but before that, I wasactually I worked in politics.
I actually worked for SenatorDonald Regal, who uh actually
passed away today as we recordthis.
Uh just got the news of that.
He was 88 years old.
I worked for him on the staff ofthe Senate Banking Committee.
And then I also worked for thelate governor of Connecticut,
(01:11):
Lowell Wiker.
Considering uh that one was aDemocrat, one was a Republican,
turned independent.
I think you could probablygather that my uh political
takes uh don't really mapquickly to left or right.
So yeah, they're pretty much uhpretty much across the spectrum.
So I just try to find out what'sinteresting in politics and let
my readers know about it.
SPEAKER_00 (01:31):
So how did you start it?
I mean, what what was the birthof uh political wire?
SPEAKER_01 (01:36):
So I as I said, I had worked in politics before I
had a career on Wall Street.
And uh when I one of the reasonswhy I left politics was the fact
that I had written a book thatwas published by Simon and
Schuster called You One NowWhat?
And I I needed to leave thepublic sector in order to
promote that book.
I worked, I worked for the assetman worked in the asset
(01:57):
management business in themeantime, but I missed politics.
And this was the this was thelate 1990s, this was the early
days of the internet, and Idecided that I was gonna start a
website because I had justwritten a book and and the web
was a new thing, and I thought,thought that I'd do that.
And what I modeled it after whatwhen I was in college, and
(02:17):
you'll you'll recall this aswell, John, on Fridays, the Wall
Street Journal, on the frontpage, there was a right-hand
column called Washington Wire.
And I could not wait everyFriday morning to get my copy of
the Wall Street Journal in paperform, of course.
And I I devoured that columnevery single morning.
And it was what I learned later,it was the longest-standing
(02:39):
editorial feature in Americanjournalism.
It had started in the late1940s, I believe, and it
continued through.
And interestingly enough, theinternet undermines Washington
wire for the journal, and iteventually faded away.
And anyway, political wire wasborn because I thought it was
such a great way to curate news.
(03:00):
They the journal did it bycurating these interesting
nuggets that came out of theirWashington bureau.
And with the internet and withthe ability to link to sources
all over, whether they'renewspapers or social media or
blogs or what have you, Istarted Political Wire because I
thought that this was theperfect format for the internet.
SPEAKER_00 (03:21):
And so you had to quit your job at some point to
keep updating this thing everyevery 12 minutes or whatever,
right?
SPEAKER_01 (03:28):
Well, what happened there, John, is that it was
originally I what I would do wasI would have a uh I had a
computer that would uh it was alaptop computer that would go
online at 4 a.m.
and it would download the frontpages of newspapers, um, trying
to scrape the front pages ofnewspapers, trying to gather
political stories.
(03:49):
And then I would get on thecommuter train into Manhattan
and I would compile in my trainride, I would compile a
briefing.
Here's what happened inpolitics.
Here's what's interesting.
And so for the first few years,it was actually a briefing that
for the most part, for the mostpart published in the morning.
I would occasionally update itand do other things during the
(04:10):
day, but I had a day job.
And then what I realized, what Idiscovered is there was this
fantastic new software that hadbeen developed.
It was called Gray Matter.
It was uh by a guy named NoahGray, who just released this
software which uh which ran onyour server and allowed you to
do reverse chronological posts.
So, as you know, that became theformat of blogs, and there were
(04:33):
other blogging softwarecompanies, Blogger, which Google
bought, or Movable Type, orWordPress, which is the dominant
one today.
But I started with the veryfirst software because I said
this is perfect for doing what Iwant to do.
And uh, so in many ways, I couldprobably claim ownership of the
oldest blog on the internetbecause I put this thing up uh
(04:56):
when the very first bloggingsoftware was actually released.
Anyway, it's it's been changedover time, but the core of it is
really the same, which is to tryto provide you with a snapshot
of any time that you come andview the website website at
politicalwire.com, you will findout what I think is important in
politics right now.
(05:16):
And so, as you said, it doesbecome this endless stream of
interesting news.
And politics, as you know betterthan anybody, has only gotten
faster.
There's only been a just adeluge of political news that
comes at us all the time.
But that that actually makespolitical wire a little bit more
important because having someonecurate that, tell you what's
(05:40):
important, provided in in somesort of context, I think that's
the key to political wire andthe key to a success over the
years.
SPEAKER_00 (05:46):
What happens when you go on vacation?
Like if you and your wife go toGreece, what happens to
political wire?
SPEAKER_01 (05:52):
Are you just shut down or do you keep doing it and
No, I I I I unfortunately, I wasactually recounting this story
to some friends the other day.
My wife and I had our first dateon the uh night of the Lloyd
Benson Dan Quayle debate.
And uh I wanted to rush homefrom dinner on our debate uh so
that I could watch that.
(06:13):
So my wife pretty much knew whatshe was getting into when she
when she met me.
And and no, I I really can'tstay away from it.
I have an insatiable appetitefor politics.
I would be reading the newsanyway, and it's not that big a
problem for me to continueupdating political wire.
And as my readers know, becauseI like sending them postcards of
the places that I go, I've beenall over the world.
(06:35):
And political wire, sometimesthe timing's a little different,
but you know, when I was inNepal or if if I'm in Cambodia,
things are a little bitdifferent.
But I do love traveling, but Ireally love putting political
wire together, and so I've triedto fit it in.
SPEAKER_00 (06:48):
It's incredibly impressive that you're able to
do it day in and day out, I mustsay.
It's amazing.
And at many days, I mean, thereare 20 or even 30 items.
It's uh it's just uh continuousstream, as you say in your, you
know, in your descriptor on thewebsite.
So what people are interestedin, obviously, today are you
know the upcoming midtermelections and President Trump's
(07:13):
standing, I guess you would say,in politics.
So let's start with Trump.
As far as I can tell, he has thelowest approval ratings of any
president at this juncture intheir presidency.
It's difficult, you know.
You don't know whether youdescribe it as a first term or a
second term, but is there anyway back for Trump?
(07:33):
Is or is he hit kind of a floorbut is now a ceiling of uh
support?
SPEAKER_01 (07:39):
Is there any way back?
I mean, with Donald Trump, youknow, it's really obviously hard
to say he's been the kind of uhhoudini of politics and he gets
himself out of all sorts ofjams.
But yeah, he's in a huge jamright now.
Democrats have a huge advantageas the out party right now.
Presidential disapproval hastypically been historically
decisive.
There are very, very fewexceptions, and there's there
(08:02):
were reasons for thoseexceptions.
While there's a chance, I wouldgive the a strong edge to
Democrats uh having themomentum.
You know, but there's a big buthere as well.
The the one thing that that isdifferent right now is that the
electorate is more polarizedthan ever, and that's gonna
limit the size of any blue wave.
We've seen that in recent years.
There's been a lot of waveelections, but the fact that
(08:24):
everything is more polarized andthe fact that there are fewer
truly competitive districts thanever before, that's gonna limit
the size of the wave forDemocrats.
But given the margin in theHouse and the margin of this in
the Senate, Democrats don'treally need that big a wave to
take control of one or bothchambers.
So, you know, I I'd like to saythat it's not about whether
(08:45):
there's a wave, it's about howmuch friction stops it.
And uh right now, it theadvantage is to the Democrats.
SPEAKER_00 (08:51):
Aaron Ross Powell The Republicans have a enormous
financial advantage, apparently,from all of the uh reports of
fundraising that it it's uhgigantic.
Do you think that money reallymakes any difference after a
certain point, or is it just ata certain point are there
diminishing returns to having ahuge financial advantage?
SPEAKER_01 (09:14):
Aaron Powell Yeah, I mean that's a great observation
because there's there's only somany ads you can put on on
linear television, or I guessyou can put unlimited number of
ads on the internet, but itbecomes much harder to target
them once after a certain point.
But if you put that money incontext, I think there's
something else that goes withthat.
The Republican Party andRepublican-affiliated super PECs
(09:37):
have a massive advantage.
We're talking probably half abillion dollars, if not more,
over what the Democrats haveraised.
The Democratic NationalCommittee has been a
particularly poor fundraisingvehicle over the course of the
last year and a half.
But there is one advantage thatDemocrats do have is their
candidates, and particularlytheir Senate candidates, are
raising money more money thantheir opponents.
(09:59):
And so that that is definitelyan advantage that they have.
But you're right, if ifRepublicans, and if when I say
Republicans, we're reallytalking about Donald Trump since
he controls the levers of mostof this money, if this can be
deployed in a useful way, itcould blunt the wave as well.
I mean, that is definitely, youknow, he could use it towards
boosting turnout.
(10:19):
And obviously, a guy whounexpectedly won two
presidential elections, youknow, certainly knows a thing or
two about boosting turnout.
But again, I think that the thefact that his approval rate is
so low it really limits hiseffectiveness right now.
SPEAKER_00 (10:35):
Aaron Powell That's one of the things that people
are pointing to is that theenthusiasm gap is yawning.
Uh Democrats could you knowcan't wait to go to vote, and
Republican voters or mega votersare said to be less than
enthusiastic, if not depressed,uh, and so therefore are less
likely to show up for themidterms.
(10:56):
Do you buy that?
SPEAKER_01 (10:57):
I mean, I do think that there's a I mean, the I
think we all see this justanecdotally.
We see this among Democrats thatwe talk to, how how much they
despise Trump and how much theywant to go vote against him in
any way they can.
And unfortunately for Trump andRepublicans, what's weighting
them down more than anything isthe economy, which, you know, is
always the biggest issue.
(11:17):
And even though there's a lot ofissue fragmentation right now,
the economy is the overwhelmingissue and continues to be.
So healthcare obviously plays arole.
You know, it's unlike 2022 wherethe Democrats in those midterm
elections, they lost control ofthe House, but they lost it by
fewer seats than many peoplethought.
But there was one dominant issuethat Democrats had in 2022,
(11:40):
which was the Supreme CourtDobbs decision.
And abortion really allowed themto rally their voters to their
side that year.
That is not the case right now,and right now there is no
overwhelming issue that DonaldTrump and Republicans can point
to to rally their voters.
In fact, it's the opposite.
The economy is such a drag, andthis war in the Middle East has
(12:04):
spiked the prices of energy andtherefore the prices of
virtually everything else.
It's really the worst thing inthe world that could happen to
Republicans when you look attheir electoral prognosis in
November.
Trevor Burrus, Jr.
SPEAKER_00 (12:17):
Let's talk about the United States Senate races,
because that seems to have gonefrom unlikely that the Democrats
would uh regain control of theSenate to more of a 50-50
proposition.
And one reason people think thatis that the races in North
Carolina, Maine, and Ohio areshaping up fairly well for the
(12:37):
Democrats.
The North Carolina, they have avery strong candidate.
Maine, Senator Collins, is, youknow, advancing years, let's put
it that way, and has been aroundprobably past or so by date.
And then Ohio, uh, the Democratshave a strong candidate.
What's your assessment of thosethree races?
SPEAKER_01 (12:56):
I think those are a really interesting three for you
to choose.
Democrats likely need to win twoof the three to kind of feel
good about their chances intaking control of the Senate.
And so if you look at NorthCarolina and you look at Ohio,
the Democrats got the candidatethat they wanted in both cases.
They got former governor RoyCooper in North Carolina,
extremely popular governor.
(13:17):
And even though Republicans havea structural edge, the candidate
quality is probably going to bethe thing that tips that race.
And Roy Cooper.
I, you know, I think it'stechnically a toss-up still, but
I think it's it would be reallynuts to count out Cooper in a
situation if there is, in fact,you know, momentum behind
Democratic turnout.
Ohio is similar in the fact thatthis is the seat that J.D.
(13:42):
Vance vacated to becomepresident, and you've got an
appointed Republican, JohnHusted, uh, running against the
former senator, Sherrod Brown.
And Sherrod Brown is a, youknow, he is a populist, he is a
progressive, but he is a knownname who has always outperforms
the Ohio trends.
And so if the environment isstrong nationally, you can't
(14:05):
count Sherrod Brown out.
And he's one of those candidateswho has raised a ton of money.
Now, again, this is not hisfirst rodeo.
He's been here before.
He knows how to win in Ohio, andso that's interesting.
The one that I think points tomore problems for Democrats is
Maine, because in Maine, youhave Susan Collins, first of
all, she is older than she was,but she's been a tough
(14:27):
candidate.
Six years ago, many peoplethought she was going to lose
that seat in the year that JoeBiden won the presidency, and
she managed to significantlyoutperform.
And it's made more difficult tofigure out what's happening in
Maine because the polls thereare notoriously bad.
SPEAKER_00 (14:44):
There was a group uh that I know about that did focus
group conversations.
It wasn't so much focus groupsas it were gathering people
together to talkconversationally uh for a couple
of hours about politics inVirginia and the upcoming
gubernatorial race.
And the takeaway amongst theso-called swing voters was that
(15:05):
they were quietly desperate,thoroughly convinced that
politics was corrupt, bothparties, and that they would
vote against anything that madethat sentiment known.
In other words, if they werevoting in Maine, if you
transferred that to Maine, itwouldn't matter about Graham
Platner's Nazi tattoo or hiscomments on Reddit.
(15:28):
They would just vote againstCollins because she's she's the
one in power and they're thereto vote against anyone who's
been around.
D does that strike you as trueor or uh Yeah, absolutely.
SPEAKER_01 (15:40):
I mean in the Trump era, I mean Donald Trump has
benefited from that strain samestrain in politics.
And so you know, he's gone on towin, you know, very complicated
elections that uh people gavehim no chance at for precisely
that reason.
And so again, I think that's whyit's an interesting test if
Graham Platiner is the nomineeand if he goes on to defeat
Susan Collins, a longtimeincumbent and one who has won
(16:04):
tough races before in what istypically a blue state in
presidential elections.
That that would have a bigimpact on the way Democrats view
the 2028 presidential electionand the type of candidate that
they might want to nominate.
So yeah, it's it we we have welive in interesting times, John,
as you know.
So it will be fascinating to seehow these play out.
(16:25):
Each of these races is like acrystal ball in a way.
We can kind of look into themand see what the future may be,
you know, as we look to a whatis going to be a very exciting
and tough thought-outpresidential race in a couple of
years.
SPEAKER_00 (16:37):
So there are four races that the Democrats have
some hope of winning.
They are in Alaska, Iowa, Texas,and Nebraska.
Of those four, are there anythat stand out to you?
I'm I'm of the view that I don'tknow about Alaska, so I'm I'm
putting that aside.
But I'm of the view that theDemocrats could actually win all
(16:58):
three.
Is that do you agree with that?
SPEAKER_01 (17:00):
I do.
I do think it's possible.
It really is this is one ofthese things where it depends
upon how big those the blue waveis and how big the national wins
are.
But you know, Alaska is anotherone of those states where they
got the candidate they wanted.
Mary Paltola, who was a formercongresswoman who, you know, win
won statewide because they haveonly one house seat, um, she has
(17:23):
won and she has proven herselfthat she can win there.
And so they did get thecandidate they wanted.
What makes it tougher there is alittle bit like Maine is the
polling is not as reliable as itis there as it is in other
places.
But there was a poll that cameout last week that had Peltola
leading Dan Sullivan, theincumbent senator, by six
(17:43):
percentage points.
So it's an interesting,interesting data point.
I don't know how much to make ofit because it is tough in
Alaska.
But anyway, they defin theDemocrats definitely have a
chance at this point.
In terms of the other ones youmentioned, you know, Iowa, you
know, that's a state that's beenquietly drifting right since,
you know, back in when BarackObama won it, but it still can
be somewhat elastic in a waveyear.
(18:05):
And, you know, the the fact thatJoni Ernst, the incumbent
senator, decided to step asideand to retire and not run again
makes that state much moreinteresting uh for Democrats.
In Nebraska, I'll skip toNebraska before we get to Texas,
but in in Nebraska, that'scompetitive under specific s
conditions.
You've got Dan Osborne, who'srunning as an independent, who I
(18:28):
believe lost by only sixpercentage points in the race
there two years ago when DonaldTrump won the state by 20
points.
And so with Democrats kind ofbacking an independent in
Nebraska, that's their way intopotentially winning that seat,
assuming Dan Osborne would endup caucusing with the Democrats
(18:48):
in the Senate, which he would ifthey had a chance to get the
majority, I think.
Texas is that one, you know,Democrats, as long as I can
remember, as long as you canremember, Texas is always
competitive, right?
We always hear it's going to becompetitive, but you know, you
know, I mentioned Lloyd Bensonearlier.
I don't think the Democrats havenot seen the state that Lloyd
Benson saw in quite some time.
(19:09):
And so a big wave could breakthrough in Texas, and it really
depends upon what happens inthis Senate runoff, where you've
got the incumbent senator, JohnCornyn, running against the
Attorney General, Ken Paxton.
And Paxton is an extraordinarilycontroversial candidate.
I mean, he is he is, first ofall, he's MAGA to the core.
(19:29):
Uh John Cornyn is not consideredthat, although he's done
everything he can over thecourse of the last year to cozy
up to Donald Trump and try toget Trump's endorsement.
Tellingly, though, Donald Trumphas stayed out of that race.
He has declined to endorseeither candidate.
And that's really a hugeadvantage for Ken Paxton.
Ken Paxton has all sorts ofpersonal baggage, all sorts of
(19:52):
legal baggage.
If he becomes the Republicannominee in Texas, then James
Tallarico, the Democraticnominee, who also won a pretty
tough primary, he wouldimmediately be go on the
Democratic backbench for apossible presidential run in the
future if he were to win thatrace.
He's a very adept candidate, ifyou've heard him talk.
(20:13):
You know, so Democrats have achance there.
But again, none of those statesthat you mentioned, Alaska,
Iowa, Texas, or Nebraska arereally key targets.
But if the wave is big enough,they could take one or more.
Absolutely.
Aaron Ross Powell, Jr.
SPEAKER_00 (20:26):
So the Ellis theory of how the Republicans keep
control of the Senate is thatJohn Sununu wins the Senate race
in New Hampshire.
How do you assess the NewHampshire Senate race?
SPEAKER_01 (20:39):
Aaron Powell So I again I think the Senate races
tend to break nationally, wherewhere you know where any of
these competitive races tend tobreak the way the wave is going.
We've seen this time and timeagain, although just like there
was six years ago an exceptionwith Susan Collins in Maine, uh,
and she hung on to that seat.
It certainly could happen.
And the Sununu name is obviouslywell known in New Hampshire.
(21:01):
And he was a former senatorhimself, that he just he wants
his old job back.
Again, New Hampshire, as we'veseen in so many races over the
years, it's the independentvoters that are decisive and
that you could definitely seelate swings.
So if somehow the environmentshifts towards Republicans, I
think that absolutely that wouldbe their key to holding that
seat.
I I think you'd have to give theedge to Democrats right now.
(21:24):
But again, we you you can'tpredict what's what the national
environment will be so much infour or five months.
And so that that would certainlybe a key seat for Republicans if
they do hang on to the majority.
SPEAKER_00 (21:34):
One of the races that I I'm struggling to
understand is the MichiganSenate race, where you know it's
an open seat, theoretically aDemocratic seat, so the
Democrats would hold it in thisoff year cycle or midterm cycle,
but it's consistently on thelist of Senate seats that the
Republicans might pick up.
What's going on in Michigan?
(21:55):
Why is that assessment widelyshared, as they say?
SPEAKER_01 (22:00):
Mainly because the Democrats are fighting in what
is a very, very competitiveprimary right now, and there is
no Democrat front runner inMichigan at this point.
And due to the fact that theRepublicans have rallied around
Mike Rogers, who ran statewidejust two years ago, and you
know, is a relatively strongcandidate in Michigan.
(22:20):
Right now, this is again, again,like in Maine with uh Graham
Platiner against Janet Mills inthat primary.
This this primary could also sayan awful lot about where the
Democrats are headed as a partynationally.
You've got, you know, a veryprogressive candidate running
against a very moderatecandidate, and then you've got
kind of this new differentcandidate, um, a state senator,
(22:41):
Melly Mallory McMarrow, whoactually does have a slight edge
in the polls right now, who iskind of the new face in the
different candidate forDemocrats.
And so depending upon whichdirection they choose, that
could say an awful lot againabout where Democrats are headed
in 2028.
But I think once that primarypasses us, and once we begin to
see a straight matchup between aa Republican and Democrat, and
(23:05):
we begin to get some polling onthat, the assessment of that
race may change once we get pastthe primary.
SPEAKER_00 (23:10):
I was talking to somebody the other day about the
House races.
You know, there's 17 that aresaid to be truly up for grabs,
and the three that are up forgrabs, maybe not as much as the
seventeen, and then there arefifteen out there that that in
theory a big blue wave, youknow, could bring some number of
(23:30):
them uh to the Democratic side.
This person I was talking tosaid, there's no point in
talking about the House racesbecause the Democrats are going
to recapture control of theHouse.
It's it's baked in.
Is that is that your view?
SPEAKER_01 (23:42):
It would be very, very surprising and very hard
for the Democrats to lose it.
The fundamentals all favor theDemocrats at this point, and
mainly because they don't need ahuge wave to flip the House.
They only need to need a handfulof seats.
But what is interesting, and andI think the real story in the
House races is how big the bluewave gets.
And, you know, we've had theseredistricting wars, as you know,
(24:04):
John, where the Republicansstarted it in Texas, and then
the Democrats, led by GavinNewsom, continued it in
California.
We saw last week in Virginia,the Democrats managed to force a
new map there.
And then we've got, you know, inFlorida.
Florida's now going to comeback, and just before we started
recording, you know, RonDeSantis in Florida has proposed
(24:25):
another new map to kind ofoffset what happened to
Virginia.
So on the one hand, it lookslike these are guaranteed seats
because they become you canredistrict this the map so that
the seats, you know, the seatsare held by majority with one
party or another.
But the reality is the only waythat you can do that is to make
them more competitive than theyonce were, than the than the Red
(24:47):
Republican seats were once were.
And so the process of thisredistricting may actually
backfire quite solidly onRepublicans, because if you make
a lot of solid red seats morecompetitive, then when you talk
about an additional 15 seatsthat Democrats potentially could
win, that that's when it becomesa real wave.
(25:08):
In some of the seats that we'retalking about here were
redistricted to be made lesssolidly Republican.
And so if the wave is going, youknow, it's one thing to say that
the Republicans pick up fiveseats in Texas through
re-redistricting.
You know, the reality is thatthere's still an election.
And if their wins are at theDemocrats' back and you've just
(25:29):
made a bunch of seats morecompetitive, then the Democrats
could really end up, you know,blunting the momentum.
And instead of Republicanswinning five seats, maybe they
only win three.
And that happens in each one ofthese places.
It would happen to the Democratsas well, you know, in California
and Virginia if the wins were intheir face rather than at their
(25:49):
back.
But right now, with theRepublicans being the out party
and with the president'sapproval rate so low, you know,
this could really backfirebadly, and it could turn what
would be a modest wave into arather big wave.
Trevor Burrus, Jr.
SPEAKER_00 (26:01):
Right.
unknown (26:01):
Trevor Burrus, Jr.
SPEAKER_00 (26:02):
And the coverage, political coverage so far,
hasn't really given us muchinsight or much reporting really
on the governor's races aroundin the country, and yet the
midterm elections are where mostof the gubernatorial races take
place.
Are there any gubernatorialraces that you think are
particularly interesting orimportant?
California obviously beingnumber one.
SPEAKER_01 (26:23):
Yeah, I totally agree with you.
I think California is the numberone state.
I think Florida could bepotentially interesting,
although Republicans still havean edge there.
But the and the reason whyCalifornia is so interesting is
that they have this open primaryor jungle primary where all the
candidates run together in oneprimary.
There has been no Democratbreaking out of that at this
(26:44):
point.
And so it is still quitepossible.
It's not theoretical at thispoint, it's still quite possible
that two Republicans couldemerge as the top two vote
getters and shut out theDemocrats entirely.
Now, I don't think that willhappen, but you know, here we
are at the end of April, andthat primary is coming in just
about five weeks or so.
And right now, there's stillnobody, nobody who is kind of
(27:07):
winning the hearts of Democraticvoters.
Eric Swalwell, of all people,was the candidate who was
leading the Democratic PAC, andhe dropped out in a pretty fiery
scandal, as you know.
Right now, the Democrats arejust left scrambling, and
someone's trying to see if theycan break out.
If I had to pick somebody atthis point, I would probably be
someone like Tom Steyr, a guywho's never won office before,
(27:30):
but is a billionaire and hasspending tens of millions of
dollars of his own money toincrease his name recognition in
a state where money actuallyprobably does play an important
role.
But Steyr has never won before.
He's never won office before.
And so that will be one towatch.
I mean, so that's an interestingone.
Even though these governor racesare governor's races are under
(27:50):
the radar at this point, they'repretty important for two
reasons, I'd say.
One is for the bench buildingfor candidates who have future
presidential aspirations.
So, you know, I think that thatbecomes important.
Like if you look in Maryland atWest Moore, Westmore's got to
win re-election in Maryland ifhe thinks he might run for
president.
And so that's potentiallyinteresting.
(28:11):
But the other thing is that thegovernors who are elected are
also the ones who are going tobe overseeing the redistricting
that we take place at the end ofthe decade.
And so that becomes a prettyimportant factor as well,
because particularly what we'veseen in these redistricting wars
right now, it's highly unlikelythat those wars are going to
(28:32):
cease just at the end of thiscycle.
And I think that uh both partiesare gonna look towards the end
of the decade when the newcensus comes out and and really
try to do whatever they can toeke out even more wins for their
party through creative mapdrawing.
SPEAKER_00 (28:45):
One of my favorite things about elections is are uh
referenda and initiatives.
And I wondered if you saw anyreferenda or initiatives that
were of particular interest toyou or to us, I guess.
SPEAKER_01 (29:00):
Yeah, to me, the most interesting one, and this
is something that I obviously Iread news items with um great
energy because I think it is oneof the big uh issues that we
have, and you cover it so well,which is on the whole artificial
intelligence and data centers,the the infrastructure for
artificial intelligence and thezoning fights that take place at
(29:20):
the state and local level.
I mean, that is a big deal.
And this is the type of thingthat is really potentially going
to move voters.
Now, it's not gonna be as big anissue as the economy, it's not
gonna be as big an issue as evenhealthcare.
Not in this election, maybe, butit really could be set up in the
election in two years to be amassive issue.
(29:41):
And presidential candidates fromboth parties are gonna have to
take very clear positions onthis.
It's also interesting becausewhat I one thing I love about
news items is the way that youcover the technology space.
And you've got private sectoralternatives for these data
centers.
You've got Elon Musk saying hewants to put these in space, and
that has all sorts of otherimplications because with his
(30:01):
starship and you know launchingrockets, you know, he's planning
on launching a starship at leastevery day, if not more.
That could become another issueas we go farther.
So, you know, AI data centers, Ithink, is the big issue.
It's already kind of impactingthe main democratic primary.
That's the big one that I thinkof.
SPEAKER_00 (30:20):
It's interesting because the Trump administration
has sort of the stated view isit's all about China.
The answer to everything isChina, we have to stay ahead on
AI, therefore we need the datacenters.
And so, you know, we'll plowthrough any objections because
that's in the national securityinterests of the United States.
And on the other hand, the MAGAbase, as you can see locally,
(30:44):
you know, here, there, andeverywhere, all across the
country, is adamantly opposed tothe build-out of these data
centers.
And there's a very good story, Ithink, in the Times today about
a town in in Missouri wherethey've, you know, they've
basically fired their localelected officials because they
were in favor of uh thebuild-out of a data center in in
(31:05):
that neighborhood.
So it I think it's interestingto see how it plays out, because
I agree with you.
I think it's going to be anenormous issue in 2028, not just
data centers, but the impact ofAI on our society, on our
economy, on employment, on etcetera.
SPEAKER_01 (31:21):
Absolutely.
And you you actually justpinpointed what I think is the
great challenge for theRepublican Party as we look two
years and ahead.
Is there a candidate who cankeep that party together?
The MAGA half of the RepublicanParty and the more traditional
half of the Republican Party.
Donald Trump showed that hecould do it.
It's not clear to me that any ofthe other likely candidates can
(31:42):
do it, whether it's J.D.
Vance or Marco Rubio or orsomeone like Tucker Carlson, and
maybe somebody takes takesomebody completely out of left
field.
It's very unclear to me whichRepublican can coordinate both
sides of the party.
Donald Trump had a coalition,and you know, that's how he
achieved two victories inpresidential elections.
(32:02):
It's not clear which Republicanis going to be able to do that.
SPEAKER_00 (32:05):
You know, if you think of the Democrats recapture
control of the House and in a syou know, sort of a stunning
upset, they gain control of theSenate by one vote, right?
So the Trump administrationagenda essentially ends when
those people are sworn intooffice.
So the presidential campaignbegins on the same day, right?
(32:28):
So you have all of the, as youpoint out, you have all of these
Republicans who are thinking,okay, Trump's gone, it's over,
uh, assuming, of course, that hedoes leave, and you have, you
know, Ted Cruz has his thing,and J.D.
Vance and Marco Rubio and so onand so forth, and suddenly you
have a sort of chaotic, youknow, year and a half to the
(32:49):
run-up of to the RepublicanNational Convention in 2028, it
would feature, uh, if you will,all of the divisions within the
Republican Party and within evenwithin the MAGA base.
If you look at it from theDemocratic point of view, and
they now have control of theHouse and now control of the
Senate in this scenario.
What happens on the Democraticside presidentially?
(33:11):
Is the same thing break outwhere you have all these people
in their separate lanes, or ordo you think there's some kind
of early consolidation?
Because if there is, that makesit much more likely the
Democrats will win thepresidential race in 28.
SPEAKER_01 (33:26):
Yeah, no, I think I think it'll be a mess.
I don't think the Democrats aregoing to consolidate around any
candidate.
I mean, right now, the onethat's clearly the front runner
is Gavin Newsom, but GavinNewsom comes with a lot of
baggage and a lot of a lot ofexpectations.
The advantage that someone likeGavin Newsome has is that the
more you hear him talk,particularly if you're a
Democrat, the more you end upliking him, even though you
(33:48):
might have had preconceivednotions.
Interestingly, J.D.
Vance, I think, has the oppositeissue, which is J.D.
Vance, a lot of Republicans knowwho he is, but the more he
talks, the less they like him.
And I think that that's kind ofinteresting.
But I think the Democrats arejust as likely to get a
candidate out of left field,someone that most people aren't
(34:08):
thinking.
The one that I'm thinking aboutright now would be John Ossoff,
potentially, the senator fromGeorgia.
He's up for re-election thisyear, and we didn't talk about
the Senate race in Georgia, butJohn Ossoff is leading that
race.
And obviously, Georgia is verymuch a swing state.
And if he wins by a significantmargin, I think he's immediately
enters the conversation as beinga potential presidential
(34:30):
candidate.
So I think that would beinteresting.
There's other candidates whohave been talked about like
this, someone like Ruben Gallegofrom Arizona, who's a senator,
uh, who unfortunately for hisaspirations, he happens to be
the best friend of EricSwalwell.
And that's probably not going togo over very well in a
Republican.
That's not that's not gonna goover well in a Democratic
(34:51):
primary, let's just say that.
So I I do think that there's alot of potential.
Um I mean, not since 2008 havewe have we seen such an
interesting primary, I think.
So so I think I think this isgoing to be interesting on both
sides because I don't think J.D.
Vance on the Republican side cancan seal this up quickly, even
though Marco Rubio suggests he'snot going to run against J.D.
(35:13):
Vance.
You know, we'll see.
And uh we'll see what happens,you know, after the midterms.
We'll see how damaged Vance iswith some of his positions and
if Rubio sees an opening.
And that would create obviouslygreat controversy within the
Trump administration if he wereto do that.
But they don't need to look atpeople inside the Trump
administration because TuckerCarlson seems to have already
(35:33):
broken from Trump.
He sees a lane potentially if heruns for president that is
almost like uh in opposition toTrump, a more true MAGA-type
position.
You know, Tucker Carlson has hisshare of followers.
So the Democrats, you know,while Gavin Newsom might be
considered a front runner,there's a long time, uh a long
time from now, and I could seesomeone that we're not even
(35:55):
talking about right now becomethe candidate.
SPEAKER_00 (35:57):
Yeah, my theory about the Democratic primary
campaign is that whoeverattracts the most black votes in
the South will be the nominee inthe way that same way that Biden
was able to get the nominationin uh in 2020.
One last question I wanted toask you.
People always, you know, wonderhow someone like you, what is
(36:17):
your media diet, or is it just aconstant uh flow of everything?
I mean, do you you s when youstart the day, do you think,
okay, I have to read these sevensites or these ten sites, or is
it just a matter of scramblingand keeping up with what you
can?
SPEAKER_01 (36:34):
It's a great question.
It would be impossible to toliterally read everything.
Um obviously I read all of themajor sources.
You know, my my favorite must-tonewspapers that I read are the
Wall Street Journal and the NewYork Times.
The Washington Post for a whilethere was looking like it had uh
really great coverage.
It's it's much more sporadicnow.
(36:55):
Uh the political coverage in theWashington Post.
There is a new competitor toPolitico, which is launching
pretty soon, which will becalled the Washington Star.
Um it's currently called Notice.
Notice, yeah.
N O N O T N O T U S, and that isbacked by Robert Albretton, who
also backed Politico and exitedthat and made quite a bit of
(37:17):
money, quite a bit more moneyfor himself.
And and now he is he he seems towant to have a go at it again.
Um and so he is gonna the he'sgoing to bring back the
Washington Star, which will bethe name, and they have quite a
bit of good reporting there.
But that one of the key waysthat I do it is I've over the
years, I've created all sorts ofinteresting algorithms to be
(37:38):
able to figure out what arepeople talking about, what are
people sharing, where whetherit's from Reddit forums to on
Twitter to Blue Sky to Threads,what are people, what are the
articles that people are talkingabout?
And so I do have a lot ofback-end systems that I've
developed, which will show me atany given time what people are
talking about.
And then, you know, the onething about political wire that
(38:00):
I pride myself on is it is it isall human curated.
Even though when I originallystarted, I must admit that I
thought that eventually youcould have computers do this,
you could have computers tellyou what the most important
things are.
I find that computers are still,while they're amazing at so many
things, and while AI isincredible and it's an
incredible technology, it's veryhard at telling you what's
(38:23):
important.
Right.
You know, and and and it's veryhard, hard to do that.
And so I I still think so thatthat means John, you and me are
safe.
We're uh we're we're safebecause we can tell still tell
people what the important newsis, um, and people still value
our judgments.
But I do have systems that helpuh narrow it for me in terms of
what uh at least what otherpeople are talking about on the
(38:46):
social networks and and whatthey're talking about in Reddit
forums.
And and so that kind of helps megauge what is important at any
given moment.
SPEAKER_00 (38:54):
I think uh my take on AI, which very few people
agree with, is that it willeventually come to know Tegan
Goddard and it will eventuallycome to know John Ellis, and so
it will scour all of the placesthat one would scour for the
information that you and Ipresent to our readers and
present it to us at whateverfour o'clock in the morning or
(39:17):
whenever it, you know, you wakeup, and then we'll be able to
say, this one, not that one,this one, not that one.
And it will actually enhance ourproducts.
Do you buy that or am I piped?
SPEAKER_01 (39:30):
No, I I I I buy I buy it almost entirely.
I mean, and I I'll I'll I'lltake it from here.
I mean, John, you and I have hadlunch a number of times, and I
always find our lunchesfascinating because we end up
talking about all sorts ofthings, and you know, one set of
stories leads into another, um,and we begin to have our own
takes on things and we have ourown judgment on things based
(39:51):
upon our experience.
And I can't imagine talking toClaude or Chat GPT in the same
way that I can talk to you atlunch.
So until until that happens,until my my next lunch date is
with Claude, I just I I I thinkI prefer John Ellis.
SPEAKER_00 (40:07):
All right.
I think we'll close it there.
Tagan, thank you very much forjoining us today.
Uh, we urge all of our listenersand the fastest growing audience
in America to subscribe topoliticalwire.com.
Pay for the subscription.
You get uh a lot of bonusmaterial as a result.
And uh Tegan, thanks again fordoing this.
SPEAKER_01 (40:28):
It's my pleasure, John.
Real, real pleasure to talk toyou.
Thanks so much.
Hello and welcome back to the News Items Podcast.
I'm John Ellis.
I'm the founder and editor oftwo Substack newsletters.
One is called News Items, theother is called Political News
Items, and you can find themboth at news-items.com.
My guest today is Tegan Goddard.
Tagan is the founder and editorof Political Wire.
(00:23):
You can find that atpoliticalwire.com.
It's one of the very best andmost influential political
websites in the United States,and it updates continuously
throughout the day.
And Tegan, thank you very muchfor joining us.
SPEAKER_01 (00:38):
Thanks for having me, John.
I'm a big fan and a longtimereader of news items, as you
know.
SPEAKER_00 (00:43):
Thank you.
So it's an interesting story.
We you were like an investmentbanker or something, right?
SPEAKER_01 (00:49):
I worked, I worked in the asset management field,
but but before that, I wasactually I worked in politics.
I actually worked for SenatorDonald Regal, who uh actually
passed away today as we recordthis.
Uh just got the news of that.
He was 88 years old.
I worked for him on the staff ofthe Senate Banking Committee.
And then I also worked for thelate governor of Connecticut,
(01:11):
Lowell Wiker.
Considering uh that one was aDemocrat, one was a Republican,
turned independent.
I think you could probablygather that my uh political
takes uh don't really mapquickly to left or right.
So yeah, they're pretty much uhpretty much across the spectrum.
So I just try to find out what'sinteresting in politics and let
my readers know about it.
SPEAKER_00 (01:31):
So how did you start it?
I mean, what what was the birthof uh political wire?
SPEAKER_01 (01:36):
So I as I said, I had worked in politics before I
had a career on Wall Street.
And uh when I one of the reasonswhy I left politics was the fact
that I had written a book thatwas published by Simon and
Schuster called You One NowWhat?
And I I needed to leave thepublic sector in order to
promote that book.
I worked, I worked for the assetman worked in the asset
(01:57):
management business in themeantime, but I missed politics.
And this was the this was thelate 1990s, this was the early
days of the internet, and Idecided that I was gonna start a
website because I had justwritten a book and and the web
was a new thing, and I thought,thought that I'd do that.
And what I modeled it after whatwhen I was in college, and
(02:17):
you'll you'll recall this aswell, John, on Fridays, the Wall
Street Journal, on the frontpage, there was a right-hand
column called Washington Wire.
And I could not wait everyFriday morning to get my copy of
the Wall Street Journal in paperform, of course.
And I I devoured that columnevery single morning.
And it was what I learned later,it was the longest-standing
(02:39):
editorial feature in Americanjournalism.
It had started in the late1940s, I believe, and it
continued through.
And interestingly enough, theinternet undermines Washington
wire for the journal, and iteventually faded away.
And anyway, political wire wasborn because I thought it was
such a great way to curate news.
(03:00):
They the journal did it bycurating these interesting
nuggets that came out of theirWashington bureau.
And with the internet and withthe ability to link to sources
all over, whether they'renewspapers or social media or
blogs or what have you, Istarted Political Wire because I
thought that this was theperfect format for the internet.
SPEAKER_00 (03:21):
And so you had to quit your job at some point to
keep updating this thing everyevery 12 minutes or whatever,
right?
SPEAKER_01 (03:28):
Well, what happened there, John, is that it was
originally I what I would do wasI would have a uh I had a
computer that would uh it was alaptop computer that would go
online at 4 a.m.
and it would download the frontpages of newspapers, um, trying
to scrape the front pages ofnewspapers, trying to gather
political stories.
(03:49):
And then I would get on thecommuter train into Manhattan
and I would compile in my trainride, I would compile a
briefing.
Here's what happened inpolitics.
Here's what's interesting.
And so for the first few years,it was actually a briefing that
for the most part, for the mostpart published in the morning.
I would occasionally update itand do other things during the
(04:10):
day, but I had a day job.
And then what I realized, what Idiscovered is there was this
fantastic new software that hadbeen developed.
It was called Gray Matter.
It was uh by a guy named NoahGray, who just released this
software which uh which ran onyour server and allowed you to
do reverse chronological posts.
So, as you know, that became theformat of blogs, and there were
(04:33):
other blogging softwarecompanies, Blogger, which Google
bought, or Movable Type, orWordPress, which is the dominant
one today.
But I started with the veryfirst software because I said
this is perfect for doing what Iwant to do.
And uh, so in many ways, I couldprobably claim ownership of the
oldest blog on the internetbecause I put this thing up uh
(04:56):
when the very first bloggingsoftware was actually released.
Anyway, it's it's been changedover time, but the core of it is
really the same, which is to tryto provide you with a snapshot
of any time that you come andview the website website at
politicalwire.com, you will findout what I think is important in
politics right now.
(05:16):
And so, as you said, it doesbecome this endless stream of
interesting news.
And politics, as you know betterthan anybody, has only gotten
faster.
There's only been a just adeluge of political news that
comes at us all the time.
But that that actually makespolitical wire a little bit more
important because having someonecurate that, tell you what's
(05:40):
important, provided in in somesort of context, I think that's
the key to political wire andthe key to a success over the
years.
SPEAKER_00 (05:46):
What happens when you go on vacation?
Like if you and your wife go toGreece, what happens to
political wire?
SPEAKER_01 (05:52):
Are you just shut down or do you keep doing it and
No, I I I I unfortunately, I wasactually recounting this story
to some friends the other day.
My wife and I had our first dateon the uh night of the Lloyd
Benson Dan Quayle debate.
And uh I wanted to rush homefrom dinner on our debate uh so
that I could watch that.
(06:13):
So my wife pretty much knew whatshe was getting into when she
when she met me.
And and no, I I really can'tstay away from it.
I have an insatiable appetitefor politics.
I would be reading the newsanyway, and it's not that big a
problem for me to continueupdating political wire.
And as my readers know, becauseI like sending them postcards of
the places that I go, I've beenall over the world.
(06:35):
And political wire, sometimesthe timing's a little different,
but you know, when I was inNepal or if if I'm in Cambodia,
things are a little bitdifferent.
But I do love traveling, but Ireally love putting political
wire together, and so I've triedto fit it in.
SPEAKER_00 (06:48):
It's incredibly impressive that you're able to
do it day in and day out, I mustsay.
It's amazing.
And at many days, I mean, thereare 20 or even 30 items.
It's uh it's just uh continuousstream, as you say in your, you
know, in your descriptor on thewebsite.
So what people are interestedin, obviously, today are you
know the upcoming midtermelections and President Trump's
(07:13):
standing, I guess you would say,in politics.
So let's start with Trump.
As far as I can tell, he has thelowest approval ratings of any
president at this juncture intheir presidency.
It's difficult, you know.
You don't know whether youdescribe it as a first term or a
second term, but is there anyway back for Trump?
(07:33):
Is or is he hit kind of a floorbut is now a ceiling of uh
support?
SPEAKER_01 (07:39):
Is there any way back?
I mean, with Donald Trump, youknow, it's really obviously hard
to say he's been the kind of uhhoudini of politics and he gets
himself out of all sorts ofjams.
But yeah, he's in a huge jamright now.
Democrats have a huge advantageas the out party right now.
Presidential disapproval hastypically been historically
decisive.
There are very, very fewexceptions, and there's there
(08:02):
were reasons for thoseexceptions.
While there's a chance, I wouldgive the a strong edge to
Democrats uh having themomentum.
You know, but there's a big buthere as well.
The the one thing that that isdifferent right now is that the
electorate is more polarizedthan ever, and that's gonna
limit the size of any blue wave.
We've seen that in recent years.
There's been a lot of waveelections, but the fact that
(08:24):
everything is more polarized andthe fact that there are fewer
truly competitive districts thanever before, that's gonna limit
the size of the wave forDemocrats.
But given the margin in theHouse and the margin of this in
the Senate, Democrats don'treally need that big a wave to
take control of one or bothchambers.
So, you know, I I'd like to saythat it's not about whether
(08:45):
there's a wave, it's about howmuch friction stops it.
And uh right now, it theadvantage is to the Democrats.
SPEAKER_00 (08:51):
Aaron Ross Powell The Republicans have a enormous
financial advantage, apparently,from all of the uh reports of
fundraising that it it's uhgigantic.
Do you think that money reallymakes any difference after a
certain point, or is it just ata certain point are there
diminishing returns to having ahuge financial advantage?
SPEAKER_01 (09:14):
Aaron Powell Yeah, I mean that's a great observation
because there's there's only somany ads you can put on on
linear television, or I guessyou can put unlimited number of
ads on the internet, but itbecomes much harder to target
them once after a certain point.
But if you put that money incontext, I think there's
something else that goes withthat.
The Republican Party andRepublican-affiliated super PECs
(09:37):
have a massive advantage.
We're talking probably half abillion dollars, if not more,
over what the Democrats haveraised.
The Democratic NationalCommittee has been a
particularly poor fundraisingvehicle over the course of the
last year and a half.
But there is one advantage thatDemocrats do have is their
candidates, and particularlytheir Senate candidates, are
raising money more money thantheir opponents.
(09:59):
And so that that is definitelyan advantage that they have.
But you're right, if ifRepublicans, and if when I say
Republicans, we're reallytalking about Donald Trump since
he controls the levers of mostof this money, if this can be
deployed in a useful way, itcould blunt the wave as well.
I mean, that is definitely, youknow, he could use it towards
boosting turnout.
(10:19):
And obviously, a guy whounexpectedly won two
presidential elections, youknow, certainly knows a thing or
two about boosting turnout.
But again, I think that the thefact that his approval rate is
so low it really limits hiseffectiveness right now.
SPEAKER_00 (10:35):
Aaron Powell That's one of the things that people
are pointing to is that theenthusiasm gap is yawning.
Uh Democrats could you knowcan't wait to go to vote, and
Republican voters or mega votersare said to be less than
enthusiastic, if not depressed,uh, and so therefore are less
likely to show up for themidterms.
(10:56):
Do you buy that?
SPEAKER_01 (10:57):
I mean, I do think that there's a I mean, the I
think we all see this justanecdotally.
We see this among Democrats thatwe talk to, how how much they
despise Trump and how much theywant to go vote against him in
any way they can.
And unfortunately for Trump andRepublicans, what's weighting
them down more than anything isthe economy, which, you know, is
always the biggest issue.
(11:17):
And even though there's a lot ofissue fragmentation right now,
the economy is the overwhelmingissue and continues to be.
So healthcare obviously plays arole.
You know, it's unlike 2022 wherethe Democrats in those midterm
elections, they lost control ofthe House, but they lost it by
fewer seats than many peoplethought.
But there was one dominant issuethat Democrats had in 2022,
(11:40):
which was the Supreme CourtDobbs decision.
And abortion really allowed themto rally their voters to their
side that year.
That is not the case right now,and right now there is no
overwhelming issue that DonaldTrump and Republicans can point
to to rally their voters.
In fact, it's the opposite.
The economy is such a drag, andthis war in the Middle East has
(12:04):
spiked the prices of energy andtherefore the prices of
virtually everything else.
It's really the worst thing inthe world that could happen to
Republicans when you look attheir electoral prognosis in
November.
Trevor Burrus, Jr.
SPEAKER_00 (12:17):
Let's talk about the United States Senate races,
because that seems to have gonefrom unlikely that the Democrats
would uh regain control of theSenate to more of a 50-50
proposition.
And one reason people think thatis that the races in North
Carolina, Maine, and Ohio areshaping up fairly well for the
(12:37):
Democrats.
The North Carolina, they have avery strong candidate.
Maine, Senator Collins, is, youknow, advancing years, let's put
it that way, and has been aroundprobably past or so by date.
And then Ohio, uh, the Democratshave a strong candidate.
What's your assessment of thosethree races?
SPEAKER_01 (12:56):
I think those are a really interesting three for you
to choose.
Democrats likely need to win twoof the three to kind of feel
good about their chances intaking control of the Senate.
And so if you look at NorthCarolina and you look at Ohio,
the Democrats got the candidatethat they wanted in both cases.
They got former governor RoyCooper in North Carolina,
extremely popular governor.
(13:17):
And even though Republicans havea structural edge, the candidate
quality is probably going to bethe thing that tips that race.
And Roy Cooper.
I, you know, I think it'stechnically a toss-up still, but
I think it's it would be reallynuts to count out Cooper in a
situation if there is, in fact,you know, momentum behind
Democratic turnout.
Ohio is similar in the fact thatthis is the seat that J.D.
(13:42):
Vance vacated to becomepresident, and you've got an
appointed Republican, JohnHusted, uh, running against the
former senator, Sherrod Brown.
And Sherrod Brown is a, youknow, he is a populist, he is a
progressive, but he is a knownname who has always outperforms
the Ohio trends.
And so if the environment isstrong nationally, you can't
(14:05):
count Sherrod Brown out.
And he's one of those candidateswho has raised a ton of money.
Now, again, this is not hisfirst rodeo.
He's been here before.
He knows how to win in Ohio, andso that's interesting.
The one that I think points tomore problems for Democrats is
Maine, because in Maine, youhave Susan Collins, first of
all, she is older than she was,but she's been a tough
(14:27):
candidate.
Six years ago, many peoplethought she was going to lose
that seat in the year that JoeBiden won the presidency, and
she managed to significantlyoutperform.
And it's made more difficult tofigure out what's happening in
Maine because the polls thereare notoriously bad.
SPEAKER_00 (14:44):
There was a group uh that I know about that did focus
group conversations.
It wasn't so much focus groupsas it were gathering people
together to talkconversationally uh for a couple
of hours about politics inVirginia and the upcoming
gubernatorial race.
And the takeaway amongst theso-called swing voters was that
(15:05):
they were quietly desperate,thoroughly convinced that
politics was corrupt, bothparties, and that they would
vote against anything that madethat sentiment known.
In other words, if they werevoting in Maine, if you
transferred that to Maine, itwouldn't matter about Graham
Platner's Nazi tattoo or hiscomments on Reddit.
(15:28):
They would just vote againstCollins because she's she's the
one in power and they're thereto vote against anyone who's
been around.
D does that strike you as trueor or uh Yeah, absolutely.
SPEAKER_01 (15:40):
I mean in the Trump era, I mean Donald Trump has
benefited from that strain samestrain in politics.
And so you know, he's gone on towin, you know, very complicated
elections that uh people gavehim no chance at for precisely
that reason.
And so again, I think that's whyit's an interesting test if
Graham Platiner is the nomineeand if he goes on to defeat
Susan Collins, a longtimeincumbent and one who has won
(16:04):
tough races before in what istypically a blue state in
presidential elections.
That that would have a bigimpact on the way Democrats view
the 2028 presidential electionand the type of candidate that
they might want to nominate.
So yeah, it's it we we have welive in interesting times, John,
as you know.
So it will be fascinating to seehow these play out.
(16:25):
Each of these races is like acrystal ball in a way.
We can kind of look into themand see what the future may be,
you know, as we look to a whatis going to be a very exciting
and tough thought-outpresidential race in a couple of
years.
SPEAKER_00 (16:37):
So there are four races that the Democrats have
some hope of winning.
They are in Alaska, Iowa, Texas,and Nebraska.
Of those four, are there anythat stand out to you?
I'm I'm of the view that I don'tknow about Alaska, so I'm I'm
putting that aside.
But I'm of the view that theDemocrats could actually win all
(16:58):
three.
Is that do you agree with that?
SPEAKER_01 (17:00):
I do.
I do think it's possible.
It really is this is one ofthese things where it depends
upon how big those the blue waveis and how big the national wins
are.
But you know, Alaska is anotherone of those states where they
got the candidate they wanted.
Mary Paltola, who was a formercongresswoman who, you know, win
won statewide because they haveonly one house seat, um, she has
(17:23):
won and she has proven herselfthat she can win there.
And so they did get thecandidate they wanted.
What makes it tougher there is alittle bit like Maine is the
polling is not as reliable as itis there as it is in other
places.
But there was a poll that cameout last week that had Peltola
leading Dan Sullivan, theincumbent senator, by six
(17:43):
percentage points.
So it's an interesting,interesting data point.
I don't know how much to make ofit because it is tough in
Alaska.
But anyway, they defin theDemocrats definitely have a
chance at this point.
In terms of the other ones youmentioned, you know, Iowa, you
know, that's a state that's beenquietly drifting right since,
you know, back in when BarackObama won it, but it still can
be somewhat elastic in a waveyear.
(18:05):
And, you know, the the fact thatJoni Ernst, the incumbent
senator, decided to step asideand to retire and not run again
makes that state much moreinteresting uh for Democrats.
In Nebraska, I'll skip toNebraska before we get to Texas,
but in in Nebraska, that'scompetitive under specific s
conditions.
You've got Dan Osborne, who'srunning as an independent, who I
(18:28):
believe lost by only sixpercentage points in the race
there two years ago when DonaldTrump won the state by 20
points.
And so with Democrats kind ofbacking an independent in
Nebraska, that's their way intopotentially winning that seat,
assuming Dan Osborne would endup caucusing with the Democrats
(18:48):
in the Senate, which he would ifthey had a chance to get the
majority, I think.
Texas is that one, you know,Democrats, as long as I can
remember, as long as you canremember, Texas is always
competitive, right?
We always hear it's going to becompetitive, but you know, you
know, I mentioned Lloyd Bensonearlier.
I don't think the Democrats havenot seen the state that Lloyd
Benson saw in quite some time.
(19:09):
And so a big wave could breakthrough in Texas, and it really
depends upon what happens inthis Senate runoff, where you've
got the incumbent senator, JohnCornyn, running against the
Attorney General, Ken Paxton.
And Paxton is an extraordinarilycontroversial candidate.
I mean, he is he is, first ofall, he's MAGA to the core.
(19:29):
Uh John Cornyn is not consideredthat, although he's done
everything he can over thecourse of the last year to cozy
up to Donald Trump and try toget Trump's endorsement.
Tellingly, though, Donald Trumphas stayed out of that race.
He has declined to endorseeither candidate.
And that's really a hugeadvantage for Ken Paxton.
Ken Paxton has all sorts ofpersonal baggage, all sorts of
(19:52):
legal baggage.
If he becomes the Republicannominee in Texas, then James
Tallarico, the Democraticnominee, who also won a pretty
tough primary, he wouldimmediately be go on the
Democratic backbench for apossible presidential run in the
future if he were to win thatrace.
He's a very adept candidate, ifyou've heard him talk.
(20:13):
You know, so Democrats have achance there.
But again, none of those statesthat you mentioned, Alaska,
Iowa, Texas, or Nebraska arereally key targets.
But if the wave is big enough,they could take one or more.
Absolutely.
Aaron Ross Powell, Jr.
SPEAKER_00 (20:26):
So the Ellis theory of how the Republicans keep
control of the Senate is thatJohn Sununu wins the Senate race
in New Hampshire.
How do you assess the NewHampshire Senate race?
SPEAKER_01 (20:39):
Aaron Powell So I again I think the Senate races
tend to break nationally, wherewhere you know where any of
these competitive races tend tobreak the way the wave is going.
We've seen this time and timeagain, although just like there
was six years ago an exceptionwith Susan Collins in Maine, uh,
and she hung on to that seat.
It certainly could happen.
And the Sununu name is obviouslywell known in New Hampshire.
(21:01):
And he was a former senatorhimself, that he just he wants
his old job back.
Again, New Hampshire, as we'veseen in so many races over the
years, it's the independentvoters that are decisive and
that you could definitely seelate swings.
So if somehow the environmentshifts towards Republicans, I
think that absolutely that wouldbe their key to holding that
seat.
I I think you'd have to give theedge to Democrats right now.
(21:24):
But again, we you you can'tpredict what's what the national
environment will be so much infour or five months.
And so that that would certainlybe a key seat for Republicans if
they do hang on to the majority.
SPEAKER_00 (21:34):
One of the races that I I'm struggling to
understand is the MichiganSenate race, where you know it's
an open seat, theoretically aDemocratic seat, so the
Democrats would hold it in thisoff year cycle or midterm cycle,
but it's consistently on thelist of Senate seats that the
Republicans might pick up.
What's going on in Michigan?
(21:55):
Why is that assessment widelyshared, as they say?
SPEAKER_01 (22:00):
Mainly because the Democrats are fighting in what
is a very, very competitiveprimary right now, and there is
no Democrat front runner inMichigan at this point.
And due to the fact that theRepublicans have rallied around
Mike Rogers, who ran statewidejust two years ago, and you
know, is a relatively strongcandidate in Michigan.
(22:20):
Right now, this is again, again,like in Maine with uh Graham
Platiner against Janet Mills inthat primary.
This this primary could also sayan awful lot about where the
Democrats are headed as a partynationally.
You've got, you know, a veryprogressive candidate running
against a very moderatecandidate, and then you've got
kind of this new differentcandidate, um, a state senator,
(22:41):
Melly Mallory McMarrow, whoactually does have a slight edge
in the polls right now, who iskind of the new face in the
different candidate forDemocrats.
And so depending upon whichdirection they choose, that
could say an awful lot againabout where Democrats are headed
in 2028.
But I think once that primarypasses us, and once we begin to
see a straight matchup between aa Republican and Democrat, and
(23:05):
we begin to get some polling onthat, the assessment of that
race may change once we get pastthe primary.
SPEAKER_00 (23:10):
I was talking to somebody the other day about the
House races.
You know, there's 17 that aresaid to be truly up for grabs,
and the three that are up forgrabs, maybe not as much as the
seventeen, and then there arefifteen out there that that in
theory a big blue wave, youknow, could bring some number of
(23:30):
them uh to the Democratic side.
This person I was talking tosaid, there's no point in
talking about the House racesbecause the Democrats are going
to recapture control of theHouse.
It's it's baked in.
Is that is that your view?
SPEAKER_01 (23:42):
It would be very, very surprising and very hard
for the Democrats to lose it.
The fundamentals all favor theDemocrats at this point, and
mainly because they don't need ahuge wave to flip the House.
They only need to need a handfulof seats.
But what is interesting, and andI think the real story in the
House races is how big the bluewave gets.
And, you know, we've had theseredistricting wars, as you know,
(24:04):
John, where the Republicansstarted it in Texas, and then
the Democrats, led by GavinNewsom, continued it in
California.
We saw last week in Virginia,the Democrats managed to force a
new map there.
And then we've got, you know, inFlorida.
Florida's now going to comeback, and just before we started
recording, you know, RonDeSantis in Florida has proposed
(24:25):
another new map to kind ofoffset what happened to
Virginia.
So on the one hand, it lookslike these are guaranteed seats
because they become you canredistrict this the map so that
the seats, you know, the seatsare held by majority with one
party or another.
But the reality is the only waythat you can do that is to make
them more competitive than theyonce were, than the than the Red
(24:47):
Republican seats were once were.
And so the process of thisredistricting may actually
backfire quite solidly onRepublicans, because if you make
a lot of solid red seats morecompetitive, then when you talk
about an additional 15 seatsthat Democrats potentially could
win, that that's when it becomesa real wave.
(25:08):
In some of the seats that we'retalking about here were
redistricted to be made lesssolidly Republican.
And so if the wave is going, youknow, it's one thing to say that
the Republicans pick up fiveseats in Texas through
re-redistricting.
You know, the reality is thatthere's still an election.
And if their wins are at theDemocrats' back and you've just
(25:29):
made a bunch of seats morecompetitive, then the Democrats
could really end up, you know,blunting the momentum.
And instead of Republicanswinning five seats, maybe they
only win three.
And that happens in each one ofthese places.
It would happen to the Democratsas well, you know, in California
and Virginia if the wins were intheir face rather than at their
(25:49):
back.
But right now, with theRepublicans being the out party
and with the president'sapproval rate so low, you know,
this could really backfirebadly, and it could turn what
would be a modest wave into arather big wave.
Trevor Burrus, Jr.
SPEAKER_00 (26:01):
Right.
unknown (26:01):
Trevor Burrus, Jr.
SPEAKER_00 (26:02):
And the coverage, political coverage so far,
hasn't really given us muchinsight or much reporting really
on the governor's races aroundin the country, and yet the
midterm elections are where mostof the gubernatorial races take
place.
Are there any gubernatorialraces that you think are
particularly interesting orimportant?
California obviously beingnumber one.
SPEAKER_01 (26:23):
Yeah, I totally agree with you.
I think California is the numberone state.
I think Florida could bepotentially interesting,
although Republicans still havean edge there.
But the and the reason whyCalifornia is so interesting is
that they have this open primaryor jungle primary where all the
candidates run together in oneprimary.
There has been no Democratbreaking out of that at this
(26:44):
point.
And so it is still quitepossible.
It's not theoretical at thispoint, it's still quite possible
that two Republicans couldemerge as the top two vote
getters and shut out theDemocrats entirely.
Now, I don't think that willhappen, but you know, here we
are at the end of April, andthat primary is coming in just
about five weeks or so.
And right now, there's stillnobody, nobody who is kind of
(27:07):
winning the hearts of Democraticvoters.
Eric Swalwell, of all people,was the candidate who was
leading the Democratic PAC, andhe dropped out in a pretty fiery
scandal, as you know.
Right now, the Democrats arejust left scrambling, and
someone's trying to see if theycan break out.
If I had to pick somebody atthis point, I would probably be
someone like Tom Steyr, a guywho's never won office before,
(27:30):
but is a billionaire and hasspending tens of millions of
dollars of his own money toincrease his name recognition in
a state where money actuallyprobably does play an important
role.
But Steyr has never won before.
He's never won office before.
And so that will be one towatch.
I mean, so that's an interestingone.
Even though these governor racesare governor's races are under
(27:50):
the radar at this point, they'repretty important for two
reasons, I'd say.
One is for the bench buildingfor candidates who have future
presidential aspirations.
So, you know, I think that thatbecomes important.
Like if you look in Maryland atWest Moore, Westmore's got to
win re-election in Maryland ifhe thinks he might run for
president.
And so that's potentiallyinteresting.
(28:11):
But the other thing is that thegovernors who are elected are
also the ones who are going tobe overseeing the redistricting
that we take place at the end ofthe decade.
And so that becomes a prettyimportant factor as well,
because particularly what we'veseen in these redistricting wars
right now, it's highly unlikelythat those wars are going to
(28:32):
cease just at the end of thiscycle.
And I think that uh both partiesare gonna look towards the end
of the decade when the newcensus comes out and and really
try to do whatever they can toeke out even more wins for their
party through creative mapdrawing.
SPEAKER_00 (28:45):
One of my favorite things about elections is are uh
referenda and initiatives.
And I wondered if you saw anyreferenda or initiatives that
were of particular interest toyou or to us, I guess.
SPEAKER_01 (29:00):
Yeah, to me, the most interesting one, and this
is something that I obviously Iread news items with um great
energy because I think it is oneof the big uh issues that we
have, and you cover it so well,which is on the whole artificial
intelligence and data centers,the the infrastructure for
artificial intelligence and thezoning fights that take place at
(29:20):
the state and local level.
I mean, that is a big deal.
And this is the type of thingthat is really potentially going
to move voters.
Now, it's not gonna be as big anissue as the economy, it's not
gonna be as big an issue as evenhealthcare.
Not in this election, maybe, butit really could be set up in the
election in two years to be amassive issue.
(29:41):
And presidential candidates fromboth parties are gonna have to
take very clear positions onthis.
It's also interesting becausewhat I one thing I love about
news items is the way that youcover the technology space.
And you've got private sectoralternatives for these data
centers.
You've got Elon Musk saying hewants to put these in space, and
that has all sorts of otherimplications because with his
(30:01):
starship and you know launchingrockets, you know, he's planning
on launching a starship at leastevery day, if not more.
That could become another issueas we go farther.
So, you know, AI data centers, Ithink, is the big issue.
It's already kind of impactingthe main democratic primary.
That's the big one that I thinkof.
SPEAKER_00 (30:20):
It's interesting because the Trump administration
has sort of the stated view isit's all about China.
The answer to everything isChina, we have to stay ahead on
AI, therefore we need the datacenters.
And so, you know, we'll plowthrough any objections because
that's in the national securityinterests of the United States.
And on the other hand, the MAGAbase, as you can see locally,
(30:44):
you know, here, there, andeverywhere, all across the
country, is adamantly opposed tothe build-out of these data
centers.
And there's a very good story, Ithink, in the Times today about
a town in in Missouri wherethey've, you know, they've
basically fired their localelected officials because they
were in favor of uh thebuild-out of a data center in in
(31:05):
that neighborhood.
So it I think it's interestingto see how it plays out, because
I agree with you.
I think it's going to be anenormous issue in 2028, not just
data centers, but the impact ofAI on our society, on our
economy, on employment, on etcetera.
SPEAKER_01 (31:21):
Absolutely.
And you you actually justpinpointed what I think is the
great challenge for theRepublican Party as we look two
years and ahead.
Is there a candidate who cankeep that party together?
The MAGA half of the RepublicanParty and the more traditional
half of the Republican Party.
Donald Trump showed that hecould do it.
It's not clear to me that any ofthe other likely candidates can
(31:42):
do it, whether it's J.D.
Vance or Marco Rubio or orsomeone like Tucker Carlson, and
maybe somebody takes takesomebody completely out of left
field.
It's very unclear to me whichRepublican can coordinate both
sides of the party.
Donald Trump had a coalition,and you know, that's how he
achieved two victories inpresidential elections.
(32:02):
It's not clear which Republicanis going to be able to do that.
SPEAKER_00 (32:05):
You know, if you think of the Democrats recapture
control of the House and in a syou know, sort of a stunning
upset, they gain control of theSenate by one vote, right?
So the Trump administrationagenda essentially ends when
those people are sworn intooffice.
So the presidential campaignbegins on the same day, right?
(32:28):
So you have all of the, as youpoint out, you have all of these
Republicans who are thinking,okay, Trump's gone, it's over,
uh, assuming, of course, that hedoes leave, and you have, you
know, Ted Cruz has his thing,and J.D.
Vance and Marco Rubio and so onand so forth, and suddenly you
have a sort of chaotic, youknow, year and a half to the
(32:49):
run-up of to the RepublicanNational Convention in 2028, it
would feature, uh, if you will,all of the divisions within the
Republican Party and within evenwithin the MAGA base.
If you look at it from theDemocratic point of view, and
they now have control of theHouse and now control of the
Senate in this scenario.
What happens on the Democraticside presidentially?
(33:11):
Is the same thing break outwhere you have all these people
in their separate lanes, or ordo you think there's some kind
of early consolidation?
Because if there is, that makesit much more likely the
Democrats will win thepresidential race in 28.
SPEAKER_01 (33:26):
Yeah, no, I think I think it'll be a mess.
I don't think the Democrats aregoing to consolidate around any
candidate.
I mean, right now, the onethat's clearly the front runner
is Gavin Newsom, but GavinNewsom comes with a lot of
baggage and a lot of a lot ofexpectations.
The advantage that someone likeGavin Newsome has is that the
more you hear him talk,particularly if you're a
Democrat, the more you end upliking him, even though you
(33:48):
might have had preconceivednotions.
Interestingly, J.D.
Vance, I think, has the oppositeissue, which is J.D.
Vance, a lot of Republicans knowwho he is, but the more he
talks, the less they like him.
And I think that that's kind ofinteresting.
But I think the Democrats arejust as likely to get a
candidate out of left field,someone that most people aren't
(34:08):
thinking.
The one that I'm thinking aboutright now would be John Ossoff,
potentially, the senator fromGeorgia.
He's up for re-election thisyear, and we didn't talk about
the Senate race in Georgia, butJohn Ossoff is leading that
race.
And obviously, Georgia is verymuch a swing state.
And if he wins by a significantmargin, I think he's immediately
enters the conversation as beinga potential presidential
(34:30):
candidate.
So I think that would beinteresting.
There's other candidates whohave been talked about like
this, someone like Ruben Gallegofrom Arizona, who's a senator,
uh, who unfortunately for hisaspirations, he happens to be
the best friend of EricSwalwell.
And that's probably not going togo over very well in a
Republican.
That's not that's not gonna goover well in a Democratic
(34:51):
primary, let's just say that.
So I I do think that there's alot of potential.
Um I mean, not since 2008 havewe have we seen such an
interesting primary, I think.
So so I think I think this isgoing to be interesting on both
sides because I don't think J.D.
Vance on the Republican side cancan seal this up quickly, even
though Marco Rubio suggests he'snot going to run against J.D.
(35:13):
Vance.
You know, we'll see.
And uh we'll see what happens,you know, after the midterms.
We'll see how damaged Vance iswith some of his positions and
if Rubio sees an opening.
And that would create obviouslygreat controversy within the
Trump administration if he wereto do that.
But they don't need to look atpeople inside the Trump
administration because TuckerCarlson seems to have already
(35:33):
broken from Trump.
He sees a lane potentially if heruns for president that is
almost like uh in opposition toTrump, a more true MAGA-type
position.
You know, Tucker Carlson has hisshare of followers.
So the Democrats, you know,while Gavin Newsom might be
considered a front runner,there's a long time, uh a long
time from now, and I could seesomeone that we're not even
(35:55):
talking about right now becomethe candidate.
SPEAKER_00 (35:57):
Yeah, my theory about the Democratic primary
campaign is that whoeverattracts the most black votes in
the South will be the nominee inthe way that same way that Biden
was able to get the nominationin uh in 2020.
One last question I wanted toask you.
People always, you know, wonderhow someone like you, what is
(36:17):
your media diet, or is it just aconstant uh flow of everything?
I mean, do you you s when youstart the day, do you think,
okay, I have to read these sevensites or these ten sites, or is
it just a matter of scramblingand keeping up with what you
can?
SPEAKER_01 (36:34):
It's a great question.
It would be impossible to toliterally read everything.
Um obviously I read all of themajor sources.
You know, my my favorite must-tonewspapers that I read are the
Wall Street Journal and the NewYork Times.
The Washington Post for a whilethere was looking like it had uh
really great coverage.
It's it's much more sporadicnow.
(36:55):
Uh the political coverage in theWashington Post.
There is a new competitor toPolitico, which is launching
pretty soon, which will becalled the Washington Star.
Um it's currently called Notice.
Notice, yeah.
N O N O T N O T U S, and that isbacked by Robert Albretton, who
also backed Politico and exitedthat and made quite a bit of
(37:17):
money, quite a bit more moneyfor himself.
And and now he is he he seems towant to have a go at it again.
Um and so he is gonna the he'sgoing to bring back the
Washington Star, which will bethe name, and they have quite a
bit of good reporting there.
But that one of the key waysthat I do it is I've over the
years, I've created all sorts ofinteresting algorithms to be
(37:38):
able to figure out what arepeople talking about, what are
people sharing, where whetherit's from Reddit forums to on
Twitter to Blue Sky to Threads,what are people, what are the
articles that people are talkingabout?
And so I do have a lot ofback-end systems that I've
developed, which will show me atany given time what people are
talking about.
And then, you know, the onething about political wire that
(38:00):
I pride myself on is it is it isall human curated.
Even though when I originallystarted, I must admit that I
thought that eventually youcould have computers do this,
you could have computers tellyou what the most important
things are.
I find that computers are still,while they're amazing at so many
things, and while AI isincredible and it's an
incredible technology, it's veryhard at telling you what's
(38:23):
important.
Right.
You know, and and and it's veryhard, hard to do that.
And so I I still think so thatthat means John, you and me are
safe.
We're uh we're we're safebecause we can tell still tell
people what the important newsis, um, and people still value
our judgments.
But I do have systems that helpuh narrow it for me in terms of
what uh at least what otherpeople are talking about on the
(38:46):
social networks and and whatthey're talking about in Reddit
forums.
And and so that kind of helps megauge what is important at any
given moment.
SPEAKER_00 (38:54):
I think uh my take on AI, which very few people
agree with, is that it willeventually come to know Tegan
Goddard and it will eventuallycome to know John Ellis, and so
it will scour all of the placesthat one would scour for the
information that you and Ipresent to our readers and
present it to us at whateverfour o'clock in the morning or
(39:17):
whenever it, you know, you wakeup, and then we'll be able to
say, this one, not that one,this one, not that one.
And it will actually enhance ourproducts.
Do you buy that or am I piped?
SPEAKER_01 (39:30):
No, I I I I buy I buy it almost entirely.
I mean, and I I'll I'll I'lltake it from here.
I mean, John, you and I have hadlunch a number of times, and I
always find our lunchesfascinating because we end up
talking about all sorts ofthings, and you know, one set of
stories leads into another, um,and we begin to have our own
takes on things and we have ourown judgment on things based
(39:51):
upon our experience.
And I can't imagine talking toClaude or Chat GPT in the same
way that I can talk to you atlunch.
So until until that happens,until my my next lunch date is
with Claude, I just I I I thinkI prefer John Ellis.
SPEAKER_00 (40:07):
All right.
I think we'll close it there.
Tagan, thank you very much forjoining us today.
Uh, we urge all of our listenersand the fastest growing audience
in America to subscribe topoliticalwire.com.
Pay for the subscription.
You get uh a lot of bonusmaterial as a result.
And uh Tegan, thanks again fordoing this.
SPEAKER_01 (40:28):
It's my pleasure, John.
Real, real pleasure to talk toyou.
Thanks so much.
Popular Podcasts
Betrayal Weekly
Betrayal Weekly is back for a new season. Every Thursday, Betrayal Weekly shares first-hand accounts of broken trust, shocking deceptions, and the trail of destruction they leave behind. Hosted by Andrea Gunning, this weekly ongoing series digs into real-life stories of betrayal and the aftermath. From stories of double lives to dark discoveries, these are cautionary tales and accounts of resilience against all odds. From the producers of the critically acclaimed Betrayal series, Betrayal Weekly drops new episodes every Thursday. If you would like to share your story, you can reach out to the Betrayal Team by emailing them at betrayalpod@gmail.com and follow us on Instagram at @betrayalpod and @glasspodcasts. Please join our Substack for additional exclusive content, curated book recommendations, and community discussions. Sign up FREE by clicking this link Beyond Betrayal Substack. Join our community dedicated to truth, resilience, and healing. Your voice matters! Be a part of our Betrayal journey on Substack.
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by Audiochuck Media Company.
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.