0:30

To paraphrase Bob Dylan , how

0:32

many roads must a candidate go

0:34

down before they can call themselves

0:36

the nominee ? Well , in the case of

0:39

Janelle Steltsen in the Pennsylvania 10th Congressional

0:41

District , she's

0:43

got a couple , as far as I'm concerned . Hi

0:45

, welcome to the Keystone Reckoning Podcast . I'm

0:47

Jesse White . It is Wednesday , april 10th

0:50

2024 . We are

0:52

less than two weeks away from the Pennsylvania primary

0:54

election and today we're going to be talking

0:56

about one specific race the Pennsylvania

0:59

10th Congressional District . That's where I

1:01

live , so I'm kind of immersed in the race in

1:03

terms of seeing all the ads and everything and

1:05

the operations of all

1:07

the campaigns . And it's against

1:09

Scott Perry , who you may know from such hits

1:11

as hey , let's overthrow the government

1:13

on January 6th . And no , you

1:15

may not see my text messages with Donald Trump

1:17

. I don't care if you have a congressional subpoena or not

1:20

, I serve with him in the state

1:22

house . He was a bad guy then . He's a worse

1:24

guy now . He's got to go . We've

1:26

all are clearly on the same page with that

1:28

. There are six candidates running for

1:30

the privilege to unseat him . One

1:33

of them is Janelle Steltsen

1:35

, who was a newscaster

1:37

for WGAL TV for

1:40

, I believe , 26 years 20

1:42

some years and has

1:44

now thrown her hat in the ring along

1:46

with five other candidates , all of whom

1:49

, quite honestly , are qualified . A

1:51

lot of races there's always like that one

1:53

crackpot . There

1:59

was a debate last night that actually WGAL hosted . You can see it online . I would suggest to anybody

2:01

check it out . They all actually are pretty good . You

2:04

know , there's things I like about some more than others

2:06

and vice versa , but by and

2:08

large they're all . They

2:12

all pass that base competency test Right

2:14

In terms of you know whether

2:16

or not they could theoretically at least earn my vote . And

2:19

but Janelle there's . She

2:22

has painted herself as the

2:24

front runner . You

2:28

know , kind of there's been some I

2:31

don't want to say manipulating of headlines

2:33

, but there's been some word

2:35

jujitsu to allow

2:38

her to paint herself as a front runner . And

2:43

OK , we'll call her , we'll call her the front runner

2:45

. And there are some issues that have kind of followed

2:47

her throughout the campaign that have never really been addressed

2:49

, and I've been watching those . And

2:55

then something happened yesterday that to me made it rise to the level of something . Okay , we need

2:57

to talk about all of this kind of edge totality , because

2:59

there's a there's an underlying purpose behind it

3:01

. So here's what we're going to do . There are three

3:03

main issues that I want to talk about

3:05

that are kind of questions or issues

3:08

that are hanging

3:10

out there about Stilton's race . We're

3:13

going to talk about those . Then we're going to talk about how

3:15

they've been addressed or haven't been addressed and

3:17

then why that's important . Okay , so

3:19

we're going to start with kind of the most sensational one

3:21

first . It just came out yesterday . I

3:24

have actually been sent this clip several times

3:26

by some other political people

3:28

in the area and

3:30

yesterday Shemaine Daniels , one

3:32

of the opponents or one of the candidates

3:35

in the primary , who also

3:37

was the nominee in 2022

3:39

and actually did quite well

3:41

against Perry , given

3:43

that it was not a funded race nationally

3:46

, which it will be this year , hence why

3:48

there are six candidates trying to get the nomination Her

3:51

campaign released this clip in a

3:53

press release and the clip I'm going to set

3:55

it up for you briefly because it's kind of crazy

3:57

it's a clip

4:00

from the Howard Stern Show from about

4:02

10 years ago . The date doesn't really matter , it's about

4:04

10 years ago and on

4:06

the clip because I'm going to play it for you it's

4:08

about 45 seconds long and in

4:11

the clip the Stern Show is listening

4:13

to , they're playing a clip

4:15

of wgal , so it's them listening

4:18

to wgal and in it janelle

4:20

stelton is anchoring the news and

4:23

her co-anchor is talking

4:25

about a cat bar in like belgium

4:27

, where , like people bring their cats and go and hang out

4:29

or whatever I don't know , um , and they

4:31

get . He mentions that they were also

4:34

that cat bars are not new

4:36

and that they are also popular

4:39

in parts of Asia . To

4:42

which she then said and this

4:44

is this is Janelle's quote , of course

4:47

, because they're making cat tacos out

4:49

of them and then laughed and laughed

4:51

and laughed and then threw

4:53

it over to the Tonight Show with Jimmy Fallon . This

4:56

is all , by the way , laid out in . There's a great article

4:58

in today's Penn Live by Charlie Thompson

5:00

that talks about this and some

5:02

of these other issues . So if you're looking

5:04

for a deeper dive , I would highly recommend

5:06

finding that on PennLivecom

5:08

. Ok , so I'm

5:11

going to play the clip for you right now so you can hear it for yourself

5:13

. It's not that long 45 seconds but I think

5:15

it bears being heard on its own .

5:17

Anchor woman . Now , you would think they would know better . This

5:19

is an anchor woman trying to undermine her own

5:21

career . This

5:23

is a good tape . Like you

5:25

know , when you're an anchor person , you just keep your mouth

5:28

shut because it's the cushiest job . All you have to do is

5:30

read the news . A businessman in Brussels

5:32

, belgium , has opened up a cat

5:34

bar . People can get a drink and

5:36

a bite to eat while enjoying the company

5:38

of five resident cats . Cat

5:40

bars , by the way , are not a new idea . The businesses

5:43

are very popular across Asia

5:45

, of course , because they're making tacos

5:47

out of them . That's terrible

5:50

. That's terrible . Yeah , wow , all right

5:52

, thank you for watching

5:54

News 8 at 11 . It's

5:56

a night show starring Jimmy Fallon . We'll see you tomorrow

5:59

. She's

6:01

laughing because she knows she's probably going to get fired

6:04

.

6:04

That was a thing that happened and

6:06

the interesting thing was

6:08

then the response Right . So what was her

6:10

response going to be ? You know , you go through

6:13

like the typical checklist of political

6:15

responses when they're you know you're kind of caught

6:17

saying something you shouldn't have . Right , you could say

6:19

, uh , you were you misspoke . Well

6:23

, were you trying to

6:25

disparage another ethnic group and

6:27

accidentally said asians , or

6:29

you know another animal and

6:31

say cats ? I mean , that doesn't work , right ? Um

6:34

, there's not a whole lot . There's not

6:36

a lot of ways to spin that , there's just not . My

6:39

first question was when I heard it , I was like , well

6:41

, where was the on-air apology

6:44

? Right , and because this ? I

6:46

think it was like 2009 when it happened

6:48

. It was a time when , like , twitter was

6:50

not quite a thing , you know

6:52

, it wasn't like now where something like that could have easily

6:54

gone viral very quickly . It

6:57

just , you know we weren't quite there yet . You

6:59

know it was . It was a much 2009

7:01

, a much simpler time in many ways . But

7:04

you know the thought would be okay

7:06

, you say something offensive , you , you do a

7:08

public apology , you know , you do your mea

7:11

culpa and you move on . There's no evidence

7:13

that that was done and I guess

7:15

, according to the article that

7:18

PennLive tried to

7:20

get a comment from

7:22

Janelle and instead of

7:24

actually talking to the reporter , they issued a statement

7:26

so they could you know kind of you know

7:29

frame it the way they wanted . Ok , fine , and

7:31

she says that she

7:34

apologized . She said , quote my comment was

7:36

wrong and I apologize for it . At the time this

7:38

was her statement . I was live on TV

7:40

for thousands of hours over 38 years and one

7:43

inappropriate joke from a decade ago is the worst

7:45

thing they can find and there's

7:47

more to it , but I'm going to address that in another

7:50

spot . But then PennLive

7:53

goes on to point out , quote there is no record

7:55

of the remark creating any kind of public controversy

7:57

. Her apologies Stelz's campaign

7:59

said later Tuesday , were made privately to some

8:01

viewers who had reached out with complaints . Call

8:04

me crazy , call me a conspiracy

8:06

theorist , call me whatever . Does

8:08

anybody think that there were private apologies

8:11

made ? I'd love for that person to

8:13

come forward , like you , publicly apologize

8:15

. It was racist . By the way , it was

8:17

not only racist but it's also offensive

8:19

to animal lovers , like . I've

8:21

worked with animals a lot in my career

8:23

and that

8:26

is . You know , my cat drives me crazy . My

8:28

wife's cat actually drives me crazy

8:30

. I wouldn't even think about making

8:32

a joke to her about making tacos out of it , unless

8:34

I wanted to be sleeping in the driveway for the next week Just

8:37

not cool all the way around Instead of owning

8:40

it you know deflection

8:42

, you know , try to sidestep

8:44

it , whatever . And this is kind of what I'm getting at and this

8:46

is kind of the bigger point , right , because

8:48

you might think , okay , big deal , but

8:59

you'll see now there's a pattern

9:01

here that I think we need to look at . So

9:04

let's talk about the next thing , and these have

9:06

been around for a little while and they're more widely

9:08

known . One is that

9:10

Steltsin does not live in the congressional

9:12

district , and congressional districts are big

9:14

, right , there are not that many of them

9:16

in the state . Each

9:19

one is like over 750,000 people . So

9:21

PA10 includes Dauphin , cumberland

9:24

and parts of York County right , big

9:26

areas . Steltsin lives in Lancaster

9:28

County . Now Congress , federal

9:30

Congress is the only office

9:33

where you do not need to reside in the district to run

9:35

. So you know that's the

9:37

phrase carpetbagger , right , you know that

9:39

applies here Someone

9:42

that lives somewhere else and moves somewhere

9:44

to run for office . She's technically

9:46

not even a carpetbagger , because a carpetbagger , actually

9:48

, you know , bags up their carpet and moves

9:50

. She's not moved here . There's

9:53

an article from October when she announced

9:55

, acknowledging she didn't live in the district

9:57

and she sidestepped it , stepped

10:00

it whether or not she would move

10:02

here . It says I'm reading

10:05

it said that she would address

10:07

that issue when

10:10

it arose when she had to deal

10:12

with it . She has not so far in the primary

10:14

, said yes , even if I win the primary , I

10:16

will move into the district . So

10:19

we can reasonably assume I

10:21

think the implication is here she's not moving to

10:23

the district unless and until

10:25

she's sworn in as a member of Congress . I

10:27

think that's just reality , until she

10:29

says otherwise okay

10:31

, yeah , it's Lancaster County , it's not that far

10:34

away , it's not all that different . I

10:47

just got done doing two election cycles in Lancaster County and yeah , it is a little different because

10:49

it's a different community , it's a different county , it's different people , it's different

10:51

institutions , it's different ways of doing

10:54

things . It is different . It's different elected officials

10:56

, local elected officials , different

10:58

democratic committees , different organizations

11:00

. It's different , it's not the same

11:02

. It matters to some people , it matters

11:04

to some people . The third

11:07

one and this is maybe

11:09

the most , I think , in some ways damning

11:11

right , because you can look at some of these

11:13

other ones and be like oh , it's

11:16

that political inside baseball , you're

11:19

trying to nitpick whatever . This

11:21

last one I think is problematic

11:23

, trying

11:27

to nitpick whatever . This last one I think is problematic and it is that she was a

11:29

Stelton was a registered Republican until January of 2023

11:31

. So she announced

11:33

her run for Congress in

11:36

October of 2023 . So

11:38

she clearly , and that she clearly

11:40

knew she was doing it before then . So I

11:42

matter of fact , I'm no psychic

11:44

, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say

11:46

, let's see , she changed her

11:49

party registration to Democrat in January

11:51

of 2023 . I'm going to

11:53

bet she decided to run for Congress

11:55

as a Democrat in January

11:58

2023 . Right , I mean

12:01

, come on , this isn't

12:03

hard and , by the way , this is not , this isn't

12:05

theoretical , this is very clearly public record

12:07

. We know when she changed it . So that's

12:09

a real thing . It was pointed out in the

12:11

debate last night that by

12:14

Mike O'Brien , one

12:16

of the other candidates , that because

12:18

she tried , so Stelton

12:21

has tried to kind of dodge it by

12:23

saying that she was

12:25

voting by her beliefs

12:27

. I forget exactly how she said

12:29

it , but she

12:31

was trying to imply that

12:33

she said . Here's

12:36

what the PennLive article said from today . It

12:38

says on party registration , steltsin has

12:40

explained that she gave little thought to her party registration

12:42

for most of her life as a working broadcaster

12:45

who was obligated to stay out of partisan politics

12:47

. She said the Democratic Party

12:49

has matched her personal political views for some time

12:51

now and she made the registration switch official

12:54

last year . Prior to joining the race was

12:58

and it's a valid point

13:00

that because Stelton had voted in the Republican

13:03

primaries through 2022 , she

13:06

was , by definition , casting votes for candidate

13:08

to her anti-abortion , anti-union , anti-public

13:15

education , anti-climate and anti-democracy Right , because that's all there was on the ballot

13:18

. On a Republican primary ballot . There are no good choices . There are no good choices

13:21

. The good choices are very , very few

13:23

and far between . So , by

13:25

unless she didn't vote which she did

13:27

so by voting she voted for

13:29

some of these people that were

13:31

not anybody that a Democratic primary

13:34

voter would support . That's

13:36

problematic . That's problematic

13:38

. So let's put

13:40

all of this together . Ok , let's

13:42

synthesize it . Now . We've got all these ingredients

13:45

, let's throw them in the blender and see what we come up

13:47

with . So let's put all of this together . Okay , let's synthesize it . Now We've got

13:49

all these ingredients , let's throw them in the blender and see what we come up with . To

13:58

me , this is one of the best examples I've ever seen of opportunism and the attempt

14:00

to create an image of a candidate that isn't accurate

14:02

. It is an attempt to

14:04

take a shortcut . Let's call

14:06

this what it is . You voted in the Republican

14:09

primary and you were a registered Republican . You

14:11

know what that makes you A Republican . You

14:13

were a Republican . Own it , own

14:16

it you were . You are

14:18

running for Congress in a place you don't

14:21

live because you think you

14:23

have a better chance of winning , because

14:25

you think Scott Perry is vulnerable and

14:28

you think that the race is going to be funded

14:30

nationally and that's where you

14:32

personally have a better chance

14:34

of being elected in your mind . For

14:37

those that don't know , the congressman

14:39

in PA 11 is Lloyd Smucker , who's

14:42

not a whole lot better than Scott

14:44

Perry . He's a pretty bad guy . What's

14:46

the difference ? Well , the

14:49

district is more likely to flip

14:51

in PA-10 than it is

14:53

in PA-11 . So instead

14:55

of standing up for her own community to run for

14:57

Congress , she's running for Congress somewhere

14:59

else because that's what's better for

15:01

her . It would probably be better for

15:03

PA 11 and the voters there for

15:06

her to run there . And then we have another

15:08

candidate in PA 10 that's qualified and

15:10

we have two good Democratic candidates

15:13

in theory . But no , we've

15:15

got to slide over to where we don't live because

15:18

that's the better odds of getting elected

15:20

Right . So there's that kind of like

15:22

naked ambition . That is just super

15:24

obvious . The

15:26

fact that you know , and maybe it's the

15:28

fact that because you lived in PA

15:31

11 as a Republican

15:33

, you voted for Lloyd Smucker how many

15:36

times did you vote for Lloyd Smucker ? Be real

15:38

awkward to turn around and run and run against them . Now

15:40

See how this all kind of meshes together and run against them . Now See how

15:42

this all kind of meshes together , paints a picture that's not very

15:44

, not great . It's

15:46

not great , and so that's

15:48

all there . And to me even

15:51

all of that is not necessarily disqualifying

15:54

. But to me this part

15:56

is this part that's coming up , is

15:58

what really ? When I was like well , I guess now

16:00

I have to talk about this , because

16:11

during the debate last night and also in her statement about the cat taco thing , she made

16:13

a comment . When Mike O'Brien talked about her voter registration , her

16:15

response was , quote you

16:17

have just given Scott Perry his dream this

16:21

Dem on Dem violence . I think

16:23

everybody up here is doing a great , outstanding job

16:25

in the race . Let's cut it out . Let's keep our eyes on the prize

16:27

and let's go after the guy who really needs to be gotten rid

16:29

of . So that's clearly

16:31

deflection , right , it's self-victimization

16:35

. You know , instead

16:37

of having to address the issues which are valid

16:39

, right , like there are three of them now that

16:42

are legit , like , having been a candidate

16:44

and been an elected official , I could tell you I've

16:47

had to answer for a lot less . A lot less

16:49

. In one way , she's

16:51

probably right in terms of giving

16:54

you know , you talk about giving Scott Perry his dream

16:56

. Scott Perry's dream is

16:58

to run against somebody that can

17:00

easily be slashed up politically

17:03

. Scott Perry's dream is to

17:05

run against somebody that can easily be slashed up politically . Scott

17:07

Perry's dream is to run against somebody who's barely a Democrat , or is

17:09

a Democrat with , you know , in name , but with no

17:11

bona fides or no evidence of being

17:13

doing anything fighting for democratic causes

17:15

or democratic ideals . That is

17:17

, you know , I thought about it . There's

17:20

got to be a term for this , right , like , what do you call

17:22

a candidate like this ? And to me

17:24

and this isn't and I want

17:26

to be very clear , this has nothing to do with gender

17:28

, right , it's . It's the gender

17:31

connotation , is , is Comes

17:33

with this term , but it's not what I mean by it . It's

17:35

, I feel like we're looking at a Stepford

17:38

candidate , right Like

17:40

it's manufactured . It's being

17:42

put together from pieces and we

17:45

have to hope that the veneer doesn't break . And

17:47

the thing about that is is that

17:49

, look , primary elections

17:52

are crucibles , are

17:59

crucibles . You put candidates in there , you put the pressure on them and the voters then decide

18:02

who emerges from that as the best possible candidate

18:04

to run in the general election

18:06

. We know that Scott Perry A

18:08

needs to be defeated . B is not going

18:10

to be easy to beat . Now there

18:12

can be many differing opinions about what kind

18:14

of a candidate it will take to beat him

18:17

. Reasonable people can differ on that . I

18:20

think the last couple of cycles , what we've seen

18:22

in that race with George

18:24

Scott , then Eugene DiPasquale , then Shemaine Daniels

18:26

there have been a lot of

18:28

theories about that which we don't have time for

18:30

right now . But the point of a

18:33

primary is to vet

18:35

these candidates . Point of a primary is to vet these

18:37

candidates and I'm sorry , but

18:39

when these questions are being

18:41

asked of Janelle Steltsen or any

18:43

candidate but I'm using Janelle because it happened , it

18:46

literally just happened when

18:52

those questions are being asked , you have an obligation to answer them . You owe it to the voters

18:54

to answer them . We may not like the

18:56

answers , but we deserve answers

18:58

. These are not little minor nickel

19:00

and dime things . And , by

19:02

the way , if you think that you're if

19:05

for Janelle , if you think that this

19:07

is being treated poorly , if

19:09

you think this is , you know , worthy

19:14

of victimization , self-victimization , I've

19:16

got some bad news for you . The second you become

19:18

the nominee Because maybe

19:21

you haven't noticed , or maybe you have

19:24

, because you were a Republican . But they

19:27

don't play around , they win

19:29

. They like to win by

19:31

whatever means necessary . So

19:33

, being asked some questions in a debate or

19:36

being confronted with your own words that were

19:38

broadcast to thousands and thousands

19:40

of people on live television if

19:42

you think that's bad , wait until

19:44

you have to deal with the reality

19:46

of running in a general election . It's

19:48

not fun , and the

19:51

whole point of a primary is to get

19:53

this stuff out of the way , to find out

19:55

what candidates are best equipped

19:57

and best suited , both in temperament

20:00

and qualifications and everything

20:02

in between , to be able to withstand

20:04

that storm and come out on

20:06

the other side as someone that the voters

20:08

and the Democratic Party and the

20:11

supporters will get behind and rally

20:13

behind . And with it being a presidential

20:15

year . The stakes are high because down-ballot

20:18

fuel up ballot results . It

20:20

matters , it matters a lot . So

20:22

that , to me , is

20:25

a huge problem . But

20:28

I want to go back to the thing that was

20:30

truly disqualifying was

20:32

part of her response as

20:35

the poor me , everybody's

20:37

ganging up on me turn

20:39

that she took when questioned about this

20:42

and I'm going to read it again . This Dem

20:44

on Dem violence . Violence

20:47

is a term that

20:50

needs to be dealt with very carefully in

20:52

politics today , for

20:54

reasons we have talked about on this podcast

20:57

, for reasons that anybody with a

20:59

working pair of eyes and half a brain

21:01

can figure out . There is , unfortunately

21:04

, real violence in

21:06

our political system today . Candidates

21:08

, supporters , people

21:11

are being subjected to violence

21:13

in ways we've never seen before or haven't seen

21:15

in our lifetimes , and it's been

21:17

normalized by the modern Republican

21:19

Party from Donald Trump on down

21:21

, and God knows . There's no bigger enabler

21:23

of it in Congress than Scott Perry . Right

21:26

. This hits home . This matters . There is real

21:28

political violence in our system . People

21:30

have died . People died on January

21:33

6th . Uniformed law enforcement

21:35

officers died on January

21:37

6th as a result of political

21:39

violence . For Janelle Steltsen

21:41

to put herself in that

21:43

category , as a victim

21:45

of dem-on-dem violence

21:47

, is not only incredibly

21:50

tone deaf . It is patently offensive

21:52

to people that have actually been subjected

21:55

to political violence . They are

21:57

not the same being asked

21:59

valid questions about

22:01

your background , your political history

22:04

and your public remarks

22:06

that were clearly racially insensitive

22:08

. Those are not attacks . Those

22:11

are legitimate

22:14

questions that , if you

22:16

are a serious candidate for the United

22:18

States Congress , you should

22:20

damn well be expected and prepared

22:23

to answer honestly

22:25

and truly . That's how

22:28

you earn the voters respect

22:30

. That's how you earn their votes

22:32

. But that's not what we're

22:34

seeing . We're seeing the classic campaign of we are

22:36

going to tell you what we're seeing . We're seeing the classic campaign of we

22:38

are going to tell you what we want to tell you about us

22:40

. We're going to ignore everything else

22:42

. We're going to paint ourselves as the front runner and

22:44

then we're going to run out the clock and hope that nobody

22:47

notices the difference . That's their narrative

22:49

, by the way . Here's how that story

22:51

ends you lose in

22:53

November . You lose because

22:55

your entire campaign was built on , you

22:58

know , a house of breadsticks and it crumbles

23:00

because you have an enthusiasm gap from

23:02

people that know you're not sincere and that you

23:04

are . You haven't done the work

23:06

to share those values , to earn the right

23:09

to say you share those values . Maybe you do share

23:11

them , but you haven't demonstrated it . You feel you look

23:13

slippery , you look like a politician

23:15

, and that's not what people want . So

23:17

, yeah , that act sometimes , oftentimes

23:20

, will get you through a primary . You'll

23:22

make it through the primary , but

23:24

that's not a victory . The victory is

23:26

winning in November and

23:32

in winning the way that she's trying to win . Because there are six candidates in the race , you

23:34

don't need a clear majority . You can win with a plurality , right

23:36

. But the real challenge will be then unifying

23:39

your other five opponents

23:41

and the way that a race like this is

23:43

being run , where

23:45

those opponents are going

23:47

to . If she wins , they're going to feel as though it

23:51

was a false

23:53

win . It was a hollow win , not

23:55

false . We're not election

23:57

deniers in this podcast . But

23:59

if they feel as though it was

24:01

not an honest win I guess

24:03

that's the best way of putting it they're

24:05

not going to back her . And if she wins with

24:08

34% of

24:10

the vote or something like that , the

24:16

narrative is very simple Well , 60 some percent of the voters voted for somebody else . I don't see

24:18

anything about the way this campaign is being run and the way you look at the interactions

24:20

last night on that stage , at debate stage , that

24:22

there's any potential to unify . You

24:24

know there were many instances where the candidates were actually very

24:27

complimentary of one another about certain things

24:29

. You didn't see that around

24:31

her . Now , maybe that's because she's perceived as the front

24:33

runner , and I get it , I'm not totally naive

24:35

but this

24:38

just feels slimy . This

24:40

feels slimy and

24:42

I really worry about

24:45

, if she wins , how this

24:47

goes , and I don't think it goes

24:49

well . I don't think it goes well and

24:51

I think that's what we have to think about as

24:54

we're choosing our nominee . We talk about electability

24:56

. We talked about all these . You know

24:59

we're all experts , right . We all throw these ideas out

25:01

there about . You know who should win and how they

25:03

can win and why they should win . But

25:05

there's like a baseline right

25:07

. Like if you want to be the Democratic

25:10

nominee , there's some basic boxes to check off

25:12

, and I just don't see them being checked

25:14

off here . You know I'm a huge

25:16

believer that you don't beat Republican with Republican

25:18

light , or you don't beat Republican

25:20

in 2024 with a Republican from 2023

25:23

. In this case doesn't work . I think

25:25

history will prove me out . Maybe I'll be

25:27

wrong and then they can pull

25:29

this clip . I mean , I'm not Howard Stern or anything , but

25:31

you know . So yeah , capacos

25:34

not good . Not

25:36

living in the district Not

25:50

good . Not living in the district not good . Republican till last year

25:52

not good . I don't know how you add all that up and say , yes , this should be our nominee . I just don't

25:54

see it . But I'm not the only one that gets to vote in these things . I have the right to

25:56

say something about it , and I have . I'm curious to hear your thoughts on it

25:58

. But yeah , so

26:01

that's where we sit and

26:03

it'll be interesting in two weeks to see how this

26:05

all plays out . I worry that I

26:07

kind of know what the script is going to look like and

26:10

it's going to be problematic . But

26:12

we have to be mindful of

26:14

the purpose of a primary . It's

26:17

not to bandwagon jump . It's to

26:19

take our obligation to vet candidates

26:21

seriously , because we need serious

26:23

people who share our

26:25

ideals , share our values running

26:28

for office . It's

26:31

got to be about the voters , it can't be

26:33

about the candidates , and everything

26:36

about this campaign feels like it's

26:38

all about the candidate and

26:40

then they just trimmed around the edges to make it fit

26:42

, try to make it fit , into the

26:44

election she's running in . I don't know . I

26:47

don't know what's going to happen , but

26:51

I know that as more of this campaign plays

26:53

out down the homestretch , I think we'll see more of

26:55

the same . I don't know how

26:57

engaged voters are to be able to put these

26:59

pieces together and if they matter to them or

27:01

not , but if nothing else , I think

27:04

, based on what we've seen from Janelle Steltsen , I

27:09

think we're going to see a lot more blowing in the wind . This has been the Keys to Reckoning podcast

27:12

. I'm Jesse White . We'll do it again tomorrow .