0:00

Hello and welcome

0:04

to this late political gap

0:06

fest. January

0:16

25th, 2024, the election no one wants edition. I'm

0:23

David Plots of CityCast in

0:25

Washington, DC. I'm

0:27

joined by John Dickerson of CBS

0:29

Primetime, who is warm but never

0:32

gloomy. New York City, hello John.

0:35

Hello David, I'm going to have to live up to that,

0:37

damn it. And from New

0:39

Haven, Connecticut, Emily Bazlone of

0:41

the New York Times Magazine and Yale University Law

0:43

School. Hello Emily. Hello,

0:45

hello. This week on the

0:48

gap fest, Trump won the New Hampshire primary.

0:50

Can anything save America from a Trump Biden

0:52

rematch? Does America want to be saved from

0:54

a Trump Biden rematch? Is this

0:56

the election that we need? Slash

0:58

deserve. Then is

1:01

the vibe session finally over? We're going to talk

1:03

about the vibe session, my favorite new term of

1:05

2024, 2023. Then

1:09

can Congress pass meaningful

1:11

immigration legislation? Plus we

1:13

will have cocktail chatter. This episode of

1:15

the gap fest is sponsored by SAP. First

1:19

the bad news. SAP

1:21

Business AI won't help you generate

1:23

cubist versions of your family's holiday

1:25

photos, but it will

1:28

help you understand which supplier is best

1:30

to help you roll out your plant-based

1:32

packaging in Southeast Asia and

1:35

identify the training your junior project manager

1:37

needs to rise up the ranks and

1:40

automate repetitive tasks while you focus

1:42

on big innovations so you

1:44

can be ready for the next opportunity. New

1:47

Hampshire primary on Tuesday over

1:49

Nikki Haley despite pretty decent turnout

1:52

of independence for

1:59

Haley. John with the big

2:01

when are small when for trump what

2:03

what good news to harold for him

2:05

what warning signs that harold for him.

2:08

Well i think it's just like what we said in iowa

2:10

which is big win which includes

2:12

the numerical when and

2:15

also the all the endorsements that came.

2:18

Leading up to new hampshire on the day

2:20

of new hampshire and following new hampshire which

2:22

is more i'm just not have to do

2:25

the vote but is just a reminder again

2:27

that the party is, backing him and backing

2:29

a nominee or likely nominee isn't that

2:32

would be what you have in a

2:34

normal race this is people backing somebody

2:36

who spent months trying to overthrow an

2:38

election somebody should be politically toxic and

2:40

now. What happens is that

2:43

you have all the leadership of the

2:45

party lining up behind him and his

2:47

strength in the party so powerful that

2:49

niche mcconnell according to punch

2:51

bowl told his republican colleagues. They

2:55

should go slow or cancel their efforts to

2:57

try to find immigration reform and will talk

2:59

about that in the topic but because trump

3:01

doesn't want it. Here you have mitch mcconnell

3:04

i mean if there was a time in

3:06

american history when members of congress didn't listen

3:08

to a president because they were their own

3:10

independent actors now it's not only listening to

3:12

a president listening to a presidential candidate. Show

3:15

his power is overwhelming

3:18

however yes there were those independent those

3:21

undeclared voters who voted for. Nikki

3:23

haley and who said basically in a general election if it's

3:25

trump versus biden there are they gonna vote for biden or

3:28

not voted all and. Edit

3:30

shows that basically trump

3:32

may very well have shrunk the

3:34

republican at least primary electorate

3:37

caucus electorate into something smaller and

3:39

harder than even his twenty twenty.

3:41

Base and that's not

3:43

great for the republican party because everything

3:46

he's doing including in his totally thin

3:48

skin reaction to nikki haley is only

3:50

going to exacerbate his problems with the

3:52

voters he needs to bring back

3:54

who we lost in twenty twenty. Emily

3:57

let's just linger for a minute on the haley who

3:59

is still. running. She has her

4:02

home state of South Carolina coming up. She

4:05

will lose that, we presume, and

4:08

that will be that, right? I think so. I mean,

4:10

it does seem

4:12

like in some ideal world for

4:14

the party, she might have more

4:16

of a runway because this is

4:18

finally the two-person race that Trump

4:20

has never faced. On the

4:22

other hand, I imagine that her defeat in South

4:24

Carolina is going to be resounding, and

4:27

it doesn't really seem like she has a

4:29

path to bringing together the different parts of

4:31

the primary electorate for the Republicans that she

4:34

would need to have. It is

4:36

interesting to me that she, at least

4:38

I think, is being more aggressive toward

4:40

Trump. She seems to finally be taking

4:43

some shots at him. It feels like

4:45

a real, not real race. It feels like a

4:49

real boxing match right now. She is being much

4:51

more, she's drawing lines much

4:53

more sharply, talking about his senior moments, talking

4:55

about his criminal trials,

4:58

and lingering on, and

5:00

having fun with his

5:03

mis—calling her Nancy Pelosi,

5:05

or using her name when he met Nancy

5:07

Pelosi, and using it as a way to

5:09

talk about his decline. I

5:11

think he's mentally fit, but I think

5:13

he's declining. Do we really want two

5:15

80-year-old candidates

5:17

running for president? Because the concern I have

5:19

is, look at Joe Biden two years ago.

5:22

Look at how much he's declined in these two years.

5:25

What I'm saying is, why can't we go

5:27

and finally get all of these people out

5:29

of D.C. and go with new generational people?

5:31

Do they have to stick around this long

5:33

when we see what a mess the country

5:35

is in? Which, going

5:38

with my previous theory, that the worst thing you can do

5:40

to beat Donald Trump

5:42

is beat Donald Trump. It's

5:45

causing heartburn in the party, because

5:47

if you've endorsed Donald Trump, you

5:49

have papered over his character flaws,

5:52

the decline, the criminal cases, the

5:54

fact he tried to overthrow an

5:56

election for multiple months. You've papered

5:58

all of You don't want Nikki

6:00

Haley running a campaign to bring all of that

6:03

out into the open. Even though it's not going

6:05

to help her, you don't want

6:07

this conversation to come out. I

6:09

mean, look at what happened to Senator Tim Scott.

6:12

He who was appointed to his seat by Nikki

6:14

Haley is stood behind Trump

6:16

at Trump's victory in New Hampshire. Very

6:18

smart political move by Trump, genius political

6:20

move by Trump. But then Trump turns

6:23

to Tim Scott and says, boy, she appointed you.

6:25

You must really hate her. Puts

6:28

him in this awful position, which he put himself

6:30

in. I mean, it's not that he is

6:32

a grown adult who made this

6:35

choice himself. But Tim Scott, even

6:37

though he dropped out and did not participate in

6:39

the New Hampshire primary, had a very bad New

6:42

Hampshire primary evening. Nobody wants more

6:44

of that. So end the race so that

6:46

there aren't those kinds of moments. So

6:48

I think that Nikki Haley is drawing these

6:50

sharp lines, but they're not likely to be

6:53

effective because of Trump's support and because

6:55

there's a general desire not to

6:58

have this conversation. Do they matter,

7:00

the shot she's taking at him about, you

7:02

know, seeming out of it,

7:05

etc., seeming so brittle and

7:07

unable to take criticism? I mean,

7:09

is she creating a set

7:11

of talking points that like are going to

7:13

show up in Democratic ads later, are just

7:16

going to penetrate to voters outside of the

7:18

obsessed with politics sphere? Or is it just

7:21

like the wrong timing for that? Well,

7:23

I think it's I'm not sure I can

7:26

imagine a couple of possible realities. The

7:28

fact that Trump keeps calling her birdbrain, I

7:31

can imagine there are probably some women out

7:33

there who have in their lives been

7:35

had their intelligence challenged by men who

7:37

felt threatened by them. And so

7:40

to the extent that they see their experience in

7:42

the way he treats women

7:45

is probably not great for him since suburban women

7:47

were a group that he lost and

7:50

was a part of his the reason he lost in 2020. Do

7:53

men ever get called birdbrains? Like it just seems

7:55

like an insult that only gets lobbed

7:58

at women. And I always think no. But

8:00

there are things that men only get called to, like asshole,

8:04

dickhead. Well I know, but

8:06

this is about like your intellectual capability. So

8:08

it has a particular wing. And

8:10

also he defaulted to, you know,

8:12

raising, like using her first given

8:14

name, you know, saying wherever she comes

8:17

from as if he didn't know that she was

8:19

from South Carolina. It's the same thing he did

8:21

with Elaine Chao. I know, but John, like... Yes,

8:23

I understand. But get to

8:25

the whatever. I mean, what if he's done a

8:27

million of these things? Well, and he lost the

8:30

2020 election and his candidates lost in 2022.

8:33

So they have been a problem for him

8:35

in the past. They're not a problem in his

8:37

party, but to Emily's question, do any of these

8:39

things hurt him later? Those are things that

8:41

might hurt him later because they hurt him in 2022 and in 2020. So

8:45

the extent to which this race continues,

8:48

the groups he's weakest with, he is

8:50

minting fresh evidence of why he's

8:52

going to continue to be weak with them. And

8:55

because you have a party that

8:57

is now associated with the abortion

8:59

decision, I can imagine additional

9:03

issues that are caused by, which

9:05

is an issue that a lot of women voters care about. It's

9:09

going to be hard to imagine how this doesn't hurt

9:11

him in the general. Because

9:14

I'm already turning to the general. I'm pivoting

9:16

to video now. I'm pivoting to the general.

9:19

Is it to Trump's advantage to basically vanish

9:22

for the next eight months or

9:25

the less he is visible, the better? Is it a

9:28

situation where he shouldn't actually try

9:31

to be public

9:33

and campaign a lot because the more

9:35

visible he is, probably the more people

9:37

will be reminded of what they don't like about him? The

9:40

first question, the second question is, does he have

9:43

the, would he ever do that? Is that a

9:45

desire of his? And

9:49

the third question is, who does it

9:51

advantage for the general

9:53

election to start so soon, John? Does

9:56

it advantage one candidate or the other, Biden or

9:58

Trump? case that

10:00

it would be better for him if he disappeared

10:02

and stopped reminding those voters that he needs. And

10:04

remember, when we talk about the voters he needs,

10:07

it's a small group in a few battleground states.

10:09

It's not a lot of people. So

10:11

there's obviously an asterisk with everything I say

10:13

because the

10:15

shape of this electorate is going to be small

10:18

and so can be moved by maybe

10:21

smaller things than I think, or he's

10:24

got more support in those states than I

10:26

think, or the support is not as weak

10:28

or as damaged by all these things I'm

10:30

mentioning. He should disappear. What he should have

10:32

done after Nikki Haley gave her speech after

10:34

the New Hampshire primaries, he should have said,

10:36

I thank her for congratulating me on

10:39

to fighting Biden. Just completely ignored her.

10:41

But his inability to show restraint

10:44

or control and the absolute itchiness

10:47

on his skin, which

10:49

is obviously amusing that he's claiming that she's

10:51

not accepting defeat when he has made it

10:54

into a professional effort

10:56

to not accept his defeat in the last

10:58

election, is like the

11:00

little incapacity he has to

11:02

manage this Haley thing goes

11:06

right to all of the things he demonstrated as

11:08

president, which is that he has no

11:10

impulse control on some things. And if there's

11:12

one thing a president needs, impulse

11:14

control. Who does it help? I

11:17

suppose it helps Biden the faster you get to

11:19

a not a referendum, but

11:21

a choice. Emily, do you agree with

11:23

that? Do you think it is advantageous

11:25

to Biden that it is now a

11:27

two man race and we can

11:29

focus not simply on whatever failings Biden

11:32

and the Biden presidency have brought us,

11:34

but on the

11:37

prospect of one of these two men is likely to

11:39

be president for the next four years. Which one do

11:41

you want it to be? Yeah,

11:43

I think so. I think Biden does better

11:45

when he's being compared to Trump. I mean,

11:48

Trump also can't disappear. I mean, he's

11:50

constitutionally incapable of disappearing. Like you said,

11:52

that is in the constitution, I think it is

11:55

section 18 B. But

12:00

also there are these looming criminal matters that

12:02

he's facing that are gonna be in the

12:04

news no matter what, and civil matters. So

12:07

there's that, he's gonna be kind

12:09

of trailing his legal issues and

12:12

he's gonna be super combative about

12:14

that, and again, that just may

12:16

play differently with the sliver

12:18

of the electorate you're talking about, John, than it

12:20

has with the Republican primary voters, I mean. I

12:23

think maybe the best

12:25

case for Biden for the general

12:28

election is that people spend

12:30

lots of time with Trump and

12:33

that they develop that sense of

12:35

agitation and unhappiness that so many

12:38

of us had in

12:40

the last, in all of the Trump

12:42

presidency, but particularly leading up to the election,

12:44

and they sense that they, I just don't,

12:46

I don't want to experience that. I

12:49

don't want to have to think about this man all

12:51

the time, and so the one act I can take

12:53

to help me not have to think about this man

12:55

is to vote against him. That's

12:57

what I think Biden needs to hope for.

13:00

My worry is that perhaps that what's gonna

13:02

happen is people are gonna just get more

13:04

disgusted with politics because they're gonna see this

13:06

election and disgust with politics

13:09

translates into sometimes people tuning out, and

13:11

then that allows

13:14

the activists, the people who are

13:16

enthusiastic to come out, and they've

13:18

come, that, Trump has a huge

13:20

number of those, and they come out and vote for him, and Biden gets

13:22

a slightly smaller turnout than

13:24

he would otherwise get, and Biden

13:27

is hurt by, in fact, Trump's presence

13:29

because it creates, Trump made this situation

13:31

where people hated politics even more and

13:33

that hurt him. So I

13:35

don't know. I can see it either one of those things

13:38

happening. And weirdly and as

13:40

usual, we really only care about

13:42

that dynamic in Michigan, Wisconsin,

13:44

Georgia, Arizona, and Pennsylvania.

13:47

Nevada, Nevada. Yeah, one. It's

13:50

just always so strange. Hey,

13:52

Ron DeSantis dropped out. Yeah. Oh, yeah.

13:55

I mean, it is amazing. If you were to look

13:57

on paper, a veteran, in

14:00

Washington, successful in an important

14:02

state for Republicans, loved

14:04

by his voting constituents as proved in

14:07

the 2022 election, connections

14:10

with evangelicals, supported by the

14:12

governor of Iowa versus a

14:16

candidate who had been accused by all

14:18

the leaders of his party of

14:20

working to overthrow an election and

14:23

shred the Constitution. You would think that

14:25

on paper, the governor would do a

14:27

little bit better than getting wiped out

14:30

after one contest. It

14:32

also proves that the authenticity metric

14:36

in politics is meaningless because Ron

14:38

DeSantis was very authentic. He was

14:41

just authentically, apparently

14:44

made people uncomfortable with his authenticity.

14:48

John, I just do want to give you credit

14:50

because you very early on when Emily and I

14:52

were talking about how DeSantis, you know, was DeSantis

14:54

is going to roll to the nomination and how

14:57

interesting it was. He's got it all. He's

14:59

going to roll. You were so skeptical because

15:01

I think you understood that when he actually

15:03

had to campaign and when people were faced

15:06

with that terrible smile and

15:08

that terrible voice and

15:11

his generally unpleasant

15:13

and unlikable public demeanor, they

15:15

would not grok to it. And

15:18

indeed, ungrok, they did. I

15:20

appreciate that because I'm feeling very

15:22

bruised this morning because, you

15:24

know, when Donald Trump claimed the last

15:26

election was stolen, I made this big

15:28

pronouncement about how that was going to

15:30

be a huge disaster for democracy and

15:32

would affect the fortunes of those

15:35

who didn't call him out in his

15:37

own party. I was right about the

15:39

democracy part. Could not have been

15:41

more wrong about the fortunes of the people who

15:43

did not call him out in November of 2020.

15:46

So thank you for reminding me that

15:48

I wasn't totally wrong about everything. Can we close

15:51

actually with one point you guys

15:53

touched on earlier? So John Cornyn, sender from

15:55

Texas, is someone who really interests me because

15:57

I think of John Cornyn as being the

16:00

the last remaining member

16:02

of the regular normal Republican Party,

16:05

very conservative, but very,

16:07

just to put it very effective, legislator

16:11

and kind of a basic

16:14

regular order Republican. And this week, Cornyn,

16:16

who, and he's been Trump skeptical forever,

16:19

this week, Cornyn, I think right after

16:21

New Hampshire, endorsed Trump. And it made me wonder,

16:24

he is like Mitch McConnell,

16:26

but Cornyn is kind of a slight is the next generation.

16:28

It made me

16:30

wonder whether these

16:32

Republicans, the last bastion of regular

16:35

people in the Republican Party, in

16:38

the Republican Party leadership, whether they're going to merely

16:41

endorse Trump, or are they going to

16:44

not just endorse Trump, but act fully

16:46

in his interest? Are they

16:48

going to campaign vigorously? Are they going

16:50

to be full-throatedly Trumpy? Are they going

16:52

to just do the bare minimum and

16:54

say, Hey, yes, Trump, but

16:57

then try to conduct a regular business? Do

16:59

you have a sense about that, John? Maybe it doesn't

17:01

matter either way. It doesn't matter what John Cornyn does

17:03

or doesn't do. Trump will win Texas. Well,

17:06

I think one thing that's important about,

17:09

or what I recognized in what Senator Cornyn

17:12

did was, and this

17:14

is why New Hampshire was a big deal for Donald Trump.

17:17

So what happened when Donald Trump claimed

17:19

the election was stolen is he got a lot

17:21

of people whipped up who believed

17:23

the lie that the election was stolen. So

17:25

he yelled fire in a crowded theater. And

17:28

what a lot of people in his party

17:30

did is instead of supporting

17:33

the cockamamie bananas idea that

17:35

the election was stolen, they said,

17:37

well, or that there was a fire

17:39

in the theater. They said, well, all these people are running

17:41

out of the theater thinking there's a fire. So we

17:44

got to look into it. So when

17:47

you yell fire in a theater, you cannot

17:49

use the fire as justification

17:51

to look into fire safety in the

17:53

theater. Right? So that's what happened in

17:55

the election, which is to say, John

17:57

Cornyn, whatever his problems

18:01

are with Donald Trump, he said, well, the voters

18:03

have spoken. So

18:06

in other words, the success in

18:09

the primaries inoculates

18:11

you against any of having to stand up

18:13

for any of the things that Donald Trump

18:15

may have done, or applying any of the

18:17

standards that you would normally apply to a

18:20

politician and particularly a president. So

18:22

of course, that totally turns on its head,

18:24

your role as a representative, right, which is

18:26

to use your conscience and standards to measure

18:28

the issues of the day. But instead, and

18:30

it's a way in which the presidency has

18:33

just basically been completely handed over to the

18:35

voters, the idea is, well, the voters have

18:37

spoken and the wisdom of the voters means

18:39

that we must all rally behind Donald Trump

18:41

to beat Joe Biden. So the

18:43

success creates a permission structure for those

18:46

kinds of politicians you're talking about, David,

18:48

who speak in terms

18:50

of standards and fashion

18:52

themselves as people who believe in a set

18:54

of core ideas that should be impervious to

18:56

the political winds of the moment. So

18:59

I think that is an interesting thing

19:01

that's happened there. And that's what I saw

19:03

in the corner decision. He'll

19:05

work as much as

19:08

he needs to in a party where the

19:10

base of the party is so controlled

19:12

by Donald Trump, which we should note

19:14

is an extraordinary political achievement for somebody

19:16

to have the control over a party

19:19

and influence over a party that Donald Trump has.

19:21

I can't think of a person in

19:23

modern history who has had that sway.

19:26

Do you want to hear more from us after

19:28

this episode? No. Emily's

19:31

reflexive, no. Shake

19:33

of the head, no. Happen. I

19:36

don't think it's in your control. A

19:39

lot of our listeners do want to hear more.

19:41

And if you do, you should stick around for

19:44

a bonus segment. Today, we're going to be talking about the crisis

19:47

in American journalism, whether anything can be done

19:49

to reverse it. But that segment is just

19:51

for Slate Plus members. So if

19:53

you are a Slate Plus member, thank you very much.

19:56

You have helped us keep the gap

19:58

going these many years. If you're not

20:00

a slate plus member, you know, thank you

20:02

too for listening. You, you have

20:04

done, I'm sure contributed to your community in

20:06

valuable ways, but we would love it if

20:09

you signed up for slate plus, uh,

20:11

you would get bonus segments of every episode of

20:13

gab fest and other slate podcasts, um,

20:16

discounts to live shows, no hitting the paywall on

20:18

the slate site. And you'll

20:20

be doing your part perhaps to reverse the

20:22

crisis in American journalism. Ironically, that is what

20:24

we're going to talk about. So if you're

20:26

a member, thank you. If you're not a

20:28

member, go to slate.com/gab fest. Plus I'm

20:31

a member today. That's like.com/gap fest. Plus

20:36

this episode of the gap fest is

20:38

sponsored by SAP. First, the bad news

20:41

SAP business AI won't help you

20:43

generate cubist versions of your family's

20:46

holiday photos, but it

20:48

will help you understand which supplier is best

20:50

to help you roll out your plant-based packaging

20:52

in Southeast Asia. Identify the

20:54

training your junior project manager needs to

20:56

rise up the ranks. And

20:58

automate repetitive tasks while you focus

21:00

on big innovations. So you

21:02

can be ready for the next opportunity, revolutionary

21:05

technology, real world results. That's

21:08

SAP business AI. This

21:10

episode is brought to you by Zbiotics. There's

21:13

now a game changing product to use before a

21:15

night out with drinks. It's called Zbiotics. Let's

21:18

face it after a night with drinks, it's tough to

21:20

bounce back the next day. You have to

21:22

make a choice. You can either have a great night or

21:24

a great next day. Zbiotics is

21:26

a surefire way to wake up

21:28

feeling fresh. After a night of

21:30

drinking Zbiotics pre-alcohol probiotic drink is

21:32

the world's first genetically engineered probiotic.

21:34

It was invented by PhD scientists

21:36

to tackle rough mornings after drinking.

21:39

Here's how it works. When you drink alcohol,

21:42

it gets converted to a toxic by-product

21:44

in the gut. It's this by-product, not

21:46

dehydration. That's to blame for your rough

21:48

next day. Zbiotics produces

21:50

an enzyme to break this by-product

21:52

down. Just remember to

21:54

make Zbiotics your first drink of the night,

21:57

drink responsibly, and you'll feel your best tomorrow.

22:00

to zbiotics.com/gabfest to get 15%

22:03

off your first order when you use gabfest

22:05

at checkout. Z-Biotic

22:07

is backed with a 100% money-back guarantee,

22:09

so if you're unsatisfied for any reason

22:12

they'll refund your money no questions asked.

22:15

Remember to head to zbiotics.com/gabfest and

22:17

use the code gabfest at checkout

22:19

for 15% off. Silas

22:22

Scanlan coined the

22:25

Amazing Expression Vibe Session last

22:29

year to express the

22:31

unhappiness that Americans have about

22:34

the economy despite objectively improving economic

22:36

conditions. Americans have been gloomy about

22:38

the economy for months. Even though

22:41

the U.S. has had the best

22:43

COVID recovery of any major economy,

22:45

has avoided recession, has

22:47

kept unemployment extremely low and

22:50

has brought inflation down nearly

22:52

to pre-pandemic levels. We

22:54

have talked about the Vibe Session before and

22:56

how it is particularly interesting from a

22:58

political standpoint because it seems

23:00

to really be hurting Joe Biden and

23:02

Joe Biden's less re-election prospects. Maybe

23:07

the Vibe Session is easing their new GDP numbers that

23:09

John's about to tell us and

23:12

it does seem that Americans are

23:14

starting to feel better about the economy.

23:17

So John, start us off with the numbers

23:19

and why those might be grounds

23:21

for Biden team celebrating. Well,

23:24

the economy grew at a

23:26

3.3% rate in the latest quarter,

23:28

which is faster than was

23:30

expected down from 4.9% in

23:33

the third quarter, but nonetheless showed

23:36

resilience in the economy. First of all,

23:40

we should just take note of where we

23:42

were, which is basically there was

23:44

a time in 2022

23:47

and 2023 when if you did not

23:49

say out loud in the morning to

23:51

your barista that the U.S. was going

23:54

into a recession, you

23:56

were not allowed to get your coffee and you might

23:58

be chased down the street. by an

24:00

angry mob. There are Wall

24:03

Street titans who went

24:06

on TV every quarter of an hour and said

24:08

there was going to be a recession. So

24:10

there hasn't been a recession. And the

24:12

market is at its, and this is not, obviously

24:14

the market is not a sign of economic health,

24:16

but just in terms of the political winds, the

24:20

market setting records, the S&P 500 set

24:22

a new record. And

24:25

inflation is coming down. And so what

24:27

this means is not only, so you

24:30

have what people

24:32

didn't think was possible, which was to

24:34

have strong growth, low unemployment, and falling

24:36

inflation. Usually somewhere it's got to give.

24:40

What's that credit to? The resilience

24:42

of the business environment, probably

24:45

the Federal Reserve. And I don't know

24:47

enough about Fed

24:49

policy to really make this claim myself, but

24:51

I mean, the Fed wanted a soft landing

24:53

and it looks like it's getting one. By

24:56

raising rates just

24:58

enough so that it didn't create a

25:01

recession, but it's slowed

25:03

inflation. That seems to be what all

25:05

the evidence suggests is happening. And I

25:07

should note that last Friday, consumer confidence,

25:09

back to your five session point, David,

25:12

consumer confidence ticked up by the most

25:14

it's gone up since

25:16

before the pandemic. Still

25:19

an extraordinarily high percentage of Americans.

25:21

I think it's 41% think we're in a recession,

25:24

even though the economy is growing, even

25:27

though all the signs are good, a remarkable

25:29

number of Americans are still very

25:32

unhappy about the economy. And that is Emily,

25:34

highly polarized. So

25:37

it's political. What's up with that?

25:39

Traditionally, when there's a Republican in

25:41

office as president, Democrats are more

25:44

pessimistic about the economy and vice

25:46

versa. But what's interesting and related

25:48

to your point is that for

25:50

Republicans right now, it's more pronounced.

25:52

So there are more of them

25:55

who are more upset about the

25:57

economy during the Biden administration. And

25:59

so, that's probably pulling down the

26:01

numbers. I was also struck by

26:04

a study from the Brookings Institution

26:06

about bad news bias, basically how

26:08

often does the media report on

26:10

the economy with a negative tone.

26:13

And the study was interesting because they

26:15

tried to look at whether that tone

26:17

matched the actual conditions of the moment

26:19

or not, whether it was out of

26:21

sync and more negative than the facts

26:23

would seem to dictate. And it seemed

26:25

like there was more bad news bias

26:28

reporting and coverage of the economy in

26:30

the last few years than there has

26:32

been before. I kind

26:34

of think that makes a difference, that

26:36

people's perceptions of the economy are partly

26:38

about what they think is happening. And

26:40

if you're constantly talking about how crappy

26:42

everything is, that that matters. I

26:44

also think, Emily, to that point, it's

26:46

very important to the political

26:48

question here, which is that if

26:50

people have a sense that the economy

26:52

is bad, regardless of the numbers, it

26:55

is very hard for Joe Biden or

26:57

any Democrat to go out and take

26:59

and drumbeat how great the economy is

27:01

and be like, take credit for how

27:03

great the economy is and look what

27:05

we've done and more Americans employ than

27:07

ever before. And the stock market at

27:10

Records Hall to project the growth, the

27:12

optimism, the we're back attitude

27:14

that really benefits

27:16

politicians and really benefits presidents. Because if

27:18

people are like, I don't feel it

27:20

or I'm getting vibes that it's not

27:23

good, that is so discordant. So insofar

27:25

as this improving

27:28

consumer sentiment improves media

27:30

coverage or makes media coverage more positive,

27:32

it also allows Biden and

27:34

other Democrats as politicians to go out

27:36

and start taking credit for the

27:40

good news, which they have not been able to

27:42

do at all for the last two

27:44

years, even though there's been plenty of good news, they

27:46

have they literally have not been able to take credit

27:48

in a way that's been effective. Yeah, I Think that's

27:50

right. I mean, I was thinking about the term

27:52

Bidenomics. And For a while, it seemed like something

27:54

the Biden people were pushing. And then I feel

27:57

like it sort of went away because it could

27:59

kind of be. Boomerang and a wonderful

28:01

hear that again now from Democrats as

28:03

they feel sunnier and is as you're

28:05

saying as other people start to feel

28:07

sunnier. I also think there's just a

28:09

hangover going on here that when there's

28:11

been a lot of inflation and like

28:13

the pessimism of Kobe that it just

28:15

takes a while for people to feel.

28:18

Confident again it is the case it

28:20

and places down the prices are high,

28:22

situations come down. A

28:24

price of something to still at this inflated

28:26

levels of? It's when inflation goes down. you

28:28

know, a gallon of gas at me as

28:30

back in Nineteen Seventy seven levels. it's a

28:33

gallon of gas, stays there and doesn't go

28:35

up more. On. And

28:37

so people, people have to adjust

28:39

their expectations about what a normal

28:41

prices which takes some time and

28:43

that seems to be part of

28:45

this consumer sentiment improving as people

28:47

have a arcs a culture. A

28:49

There's a study about how long

28:51

it takes for the effects of

28:53

inflation to wear off on people's.

28:56

Feelings. And it seems like it

28:58

takes a couple years. And

29:00

as electoral matter is, Emily was saying.

29:02

And the and the Time said that

29:05

great graph about people's opinions of the

29:07

economy the most part is in Republicans.

29:10

Change. Their view on the economy the miniature

29:12

been was elected it a new do with the

29:14

actual underlying and you can see that in the

29:17

desert rat is so striking us it drops as

29:19

much as the as views of the economy did

29:21

during cove it i mean it is is falls

29:23

off a cliff. Democrats.

29:25

On the other hand, and this what this graph

29:28

is As it's it's looking at opinions about the

29:30

economy. Overall. And and split

29:32

by party under the Trump administration and

29:34

the by administration and democrats. Get.

29:36

a increasingly worse view of the economy

29:39

under trump buddies is a slope of

29:41

gradual the a musician who had by

29:43

gets elected it is it defies gravity

29:46

i mean they're arts it's part of

29:48

the international olympic physics quiz to to

29:50

come up with the formula that describes

29:52

a precipitous drop like that and so

29:55

obviously this is one of the things

29:57

that irritates me about some of the

29:59

po polling is, and it's

30:01

why the idea of Vibe Session is

30:04

useful, and also there's kind of

30:06

a corollary, which is the way in

30:08

which partisanship, and particularly presidential partisanship,

30:10

is basically overtaken all reason. So it's

30:12

hard to know what people think

30:14

and how many people's minds will change

30:17

who will actually affect the election in

30:19

those battleground states. I would add

30:21

one other thing is Brendan Nye and that Dartmouth, the

30:23

political scientist at Dartmouth, did a paper with

30:26

some colleagues about basically people's

30:28

misperceptions about what a president has control

30:30

over. CBS News had a poll that said

30:32

60% of the country thought that a president

30:34

has a lot of control over inflation. Nye

30:37

interviewed experts, and experts

30:40

were given a range of things and asked how

30:42

much control does a president have over these things.

30:45

Inflation and the price of gas were at the lowest

30:47

end of expert

30:50

opinion on what presidents have

30:52

control over. At the high end was

30:54

things like picking a vice president. So

30:56

that disconnect between what people judge presidents

30:58

on and what they actually have effect

31:00

over is quite pronounced

31:02

when it comes to gas prices and inflation.

31:05

One thing I think Biden and Democrats need

31:07

to do, I don't

31:09

know how important rich people

31:11

are to the election,

31:15

but they do supply a lot of money. They

31:18

do help shape elite opinion. I

31:23

think the average rich person is more important to

31:25

the election than the average non-rich person. Biden

31:28

does, I think, probably

31:30

need to remind rich people how well

31:32

they're doing. Their

31:36

stocks are high. You don't think

31:38

so? You think he should? No, no. I

31:41

just think they're going to do ... Rich people are going to do even

31:43

better under Trump. He's not going to raise corporate taxes. He's

31:46

going to try and lower them again, and he's definitely not going to

31:48

raise taxes on those earning over

31:50

$400,000. Yeah,

31:52

on the tax side, but not

31:54

necessarily are my investments growing as

31:56

my company thriving piece of it. I

31:59

think there's a strong argument. that stocks

32:01

do better under Democratic presidents. I think

32:03

the economy in general does better under

32:05

Democratic presidents. Yeah, taxes will certainly be

32:08

lower if as a Republican president,

32:10

Republican Congress. That's

32:12

a really interesting question. I mean,

32:14

certainly banks and a lot of

32:16

companies that face regulation would

32:20

prefer Trump's disinterest

32:22

in those kinds of regulations. I mean, also,

32:24

just we should note, but this is, you're

32:27

making an interesting point, David, and it's the right

32:29

one, which is what are the actual policies of

32:31

the two people going to be? And Trump's

32:34

policies in a inflation

32:36

sensitive environment will be quite

32:39

inflationary. I mean, think of the

32:41

things he did. He massively increased spending.

32:43

He blew a huge

32:46

additional hole in the debt. His

32:49

tariffs are inflationary and his immigration

32:53

policies would

32:55

shrink the labor pool causing a

32:57

rise in wages, which would be passed on to in

33:00

prices. So if you're worried about inflation,

33:04

there are basically the entire Trump agenda, such

33:06

as it can be divined from the vagueness

33:09

of his campaign would be something that would

33:11

be worrisome. I did have

33:13

this final thought because I love Vibe Session

33:15

as a concept so much that are there

33:17

other things that are really run on vibes?

33:20

One is vibe vibration,

33:23

which is that a lot of people's

33:25

feelings about immigration really don't have to

33:27

do with the actual impact of immigration

33:30

on them. It has to do with the perception

33:33

about what immigration is doing

33:35

to the country broadly, but

33:37

isn't actually how

33:40

they are impacted by it. So that

33:42

immigration isn't having a huge impact. It's

33:45

not that all this border surge isn't

33:47

really real, but it is also

33:49

the case that most people are not affected by it

33:52

nearly as much as they claim to be.

33:54

That's number one. And number two is, is,

33:56

is vibish prudence, which is that like

33:59

there's a sense. about the

34:01

massive impact of the law on me

34:04

all the time. And again,

34:07

probably a lot of that is real,

34:09

but there's also a lot of inchoate

34:11

anxiety that drives people. Wait,

34:14

what was the last one? I didn't get that. Prudence?

34:16

Vibis Prudence. Like jurisprudence. Oh,

34:20

jurisprudence. I was... Okay. I

34:23

think that one's not going to fly as

34:25

a cultural... It's not going to catch fire

34:27

in... I

34:29

coined it like this second. I know. Vibe

34:33

Vibration is really good. Yeah,

34:38

that's interesting. I think everything is vibes. And

34:40

also the way a lot of the race

34:42

is covered and a lot of issues are

34:44

covered is all about vibes.

34:47

And this goes back to polling. It's

34:49

just like we could

34:52

explain what's happening in the economy or we could just go

34:54

talk to a bunch of people about the price of eggs.

34:57

And that's just so

35:00

much easier. I mean, covering the

35:02

economy through the election is really

35:05

not healthy. I mean, what's not vibes

35:07

is local, right? What's not vibes is like

35:09

the pothole at the end of your street,

35:11

the store that is opening or closing. It's

35:13

the really local thing. Hello,

35:18

it is Ryan. And we could all use

35:20

an extra bright spot in our day, couldn't

35:23

we? Just to make up for things like

35:25

sitting in traffic, doing the dishes, counting your

35:27

steps, you know, all the mundane stuff. That

35:29

is why I'm such a big fan of

35:32

Chumba Casino. Chumba Casino has all your favorite

35:34

social casino style games that you can play

35:36

for free anytime, anywhere with daily bonuses. That's

35:38

a bright new day, Lo. Actually a lot.

35:41

So sign up now at chumbacacino.com. That's

35:44

chumbacacino.com. No purchase necessary. Advice

35:49

Week is back at Slate and

35:51

we have a ton of exclusive

35:53

content and exciting perks for Slate

35:55

members. Subscribe now to unlock extra

35:57

advice with weekly bonus segments of

35:59

of Dear Prudence. Plus, you'll

36:01

get ad-free listening across all

36:03

your favorite Slate podcasts. By

36:06

joining your supporting Slate's independent journalism,

36:09

your membership matters. To

36:11

subscribe now at our special Advice Week price,

36:14

click try free at the top of your

36:16

show page on Apple Podcasts or

36:19

visit slate.com/podcast

36:21

plus. A

36:24

bipartisan Senate group had

36:26

been inching towards an immigration deal that

36:29

would potentially have restricted the flow of

36:31

migrants coming into the US at the

36:33

southern border. Republicans

36:37

seem to want such a deal because their

36:39

voters are really upset about the waves of

36:41

migrants coming from the south. And

36:44

it is probably the most

36:46

fundamental issue that Donald

36:48

Trump has defined for him and

36:51

his voters in the past eight

36:53

years. It is the key issue

36:55

in some ways for Trump, the

36:58

obsession of a lot of their voters. Democrats

37:01

want a deal because they want to diffuse

37:03

voter anger and they also know they're not

37:06

going to get any Ukraine aid passed

37:09

through Congress without immigration going first.

37:11

But now comes Mitch McConnell to say

37:14

what, John? Well, according to

37:16

Punchbowl, which scooped this on

37:18

Wednesday night, McConnell

37:20

in conversations with his

37:23

colleagues said essentially that while they

37:25

were on their way to a deal in the

37:27

Senate with the White House, that

37:29

they might have to slow their role

37:31

because Donald Trump doesn't want a

37:34

deal. And according to the

37:36

quote in Punchbowl, McConnell said, we don't want to

37:38

do anything to undermine him. So

37:40

we should note, of course, this is

37:42

extraordinary since McConnell has been attacked by

37:45

Trump repeatedly and in

37:48

quite stark terms. Trump

37:51

also used

37:53

typical racist attacks on

37:56

Elaine Chao, his wife, the

37:59

kinds of sort of to racist stuff that

38:02

he's been using with

38:04

respect to Nikki Haley. In any event,

38:07

this is what is being reported

38:09

by Punchbowl. And the idea is

38:11

basically don't give Biden a win,

38:13

keep the issue. If this is

38:15

all true, and also

38:17

I think you should leave some window open

38:19

for the idea that this was leaked, in

38:22

part to give McConnell the last bit

38:24

of leverage over the Democrats. In other words, if

38:26

Democrats think they're not going to get any deal

38:29

at all, because this is the way the Republicans

38:31

are feeling, they might concede a few more things

38:34

in the course of negotiations. So it could all

38:36

be pantomime and all

38:38

used for leverage. If

38:42

it's not used for leverage, and this is

38:44

in fact earnest, then you have this extraordinary

38:46

moment where you have the Republican

38:48

front runner and almost certain nominees saying

38:50

that he would like to see the

38:52

economy tank before he is

38:54

elected and not see immigration

38:58

fixed in any way because of

39:00

his electoral prospects. And of course, remember that it's

39:02

not just the human beings at the border, but

39:04

it's also tied to aid to Ukraine and Israel

39:07

that would be held up here in order to

39:10

be helpful and effective to Trump in the

39:12

election. So that's kind of extraordinary.

39:14

Adamus Emily, do you want to explain a

39:16

little bit about what they're negotiating around?

39:18

Because there's so many different pieces of this

39:21

immigration story. And this one, humanitarian

39:23

parole, is a really interesting concept that I

39:25

think most people, by

39:27

most people, I mean David Platts,

39:30

didn't really understand until this week.

39:32

And what's the difference between humanitarian

39:34

parole and being a refugee, asylum,

39:36

temporary protected status. And

39:38

yet this actually is at the heart of

39:40

I think what is happening

39:42

at the border in some ways. Emily

39:45

St. John, Chief of Staff, United States Humanitarian

39:47

parole is relief from deportation that the federal

39:49

government can grant. It can do it individually,

39:51

it can also do it for groups. And

39:54

the idea is that you can work, but

39:56

you're not on a path to a green

39:58

card or a permanent status or citizenship.

40:01

It's temporary, it's two years, it can

40:03

be extended. And the Biden

40:05

administration has used it as a

40:08

kind of safety valve for Ukrainian

40:10

immigrants. In the

40:12

past it was used for immigrants from Afghanistan.

40:14

It's a way of basically

40:17

letting people stay for a couple

40:19

of years in a way that they

40:21

can work. And the numbers have

40:23

gone up under Biden and

40:26

the question is how much are the

40:28

Democrats willing to give to the Republicans

40:30

in order to bring these numbers down?

40:32

That's the Republican goal and the Republicans

40:34

really want a hard cap on the

40:36

number of people who

40:38

can be allowed to stay in the country in this

40:40

way. And the Democrats don't want

40:43

a hard cap. They want something that is

40:45

more flexible because they say they may need

40:47

to respond to an international crisis or some

40:49

other reason that you wouldn't want to pre-determine

40:52

how many people can come in this way.

40:55

These are not asylum seekers, right? These are

40:57

people who are... They might be seeking asylum.

41:00

They're not asylum seekers. They might be

41:02

seeking asylum but they're not on the

41:04

path to getting asylum because they have

41:06

been accorded, because they have been given

41:08

humanitarian parole. So they may still have

41:10

an asylum claim but asylum claims take

41:13

forever to process. They have a really high

41:15

standard of proof, credible fear

41:17

of returning to your own country, basically

41:19

persecution, whereas this is a different kind

41:21

of off-ramp. And

41:24

I think one of the things that's been

41:26

so effective for the Republicans is the phrase

41:28

they've used to describe what

41:31

they say humanitarian parole is, which is

41:33

catch-and-release. This is

41:36

a very good message for

41:38

their voters, I suspect. Yeah,

41:41

it's funny. I mean, I thought catch-and-release referred

41:43

to something else and maybe it has in

41:45

the past or maybe it's just that it

41:47

is hard to keep all these different components

41:49

of American immigration straight. I thought catch-and-release was

41:51

like the people who get caught and then

41:53

they're just allowed to

41:55

stay... they're not immediately detained

41:58

or immediately turned away. This

42:00

is these people have been through process like

42:02

they're not just like showing up randomly and

42:05

actually there also are studies that people on

42:07

humanitarian parole Versus people are

42:09

detained or just as likely to come

42:12

to their proceedings to end up having to

42:14

leave all those things. Yeah, I was

42:17

also Confused

42:19

Emily about whether catch

42:21

and release related and it may in fact be used

42:23

for many different things because I don't think there is

42:25

a hard and fast definition of the way it's used

42:28

but I

42:30

thought it was both if you were caught illegally

42:32

trying to enter That

42:34

your adjudication sometimes because there's such

42:36

a backlog that

42:39

you were released into the Into

42:42

the United States, you know and supposed to come

42:44

back for your court date And that also that

42:46

was true with asylum seekers because there's such a

42:48

backlog and that both have been called

42:50

catch and release Yeah, I mean I do sure

42:52

there's something that there is a reason

42:54

why this messaging is effective. There is something

42:56

intuitively mysterious and

42:58

to many people frustrating and

43:00

annoying about the idea that someone shows up they

43:04

They don't have a right to enter

43:06

the country or to work in the country They

43:08

cross in a in a non-standard manner and

43:10

they are allowed to stay in the country

43:13

and work and there's something that is like

43:15

Wait, that's what are we doing? Why

43:17

are we allowing that? Why aren't why isn't that person just? immediately

43:21

Put on another side of some border Regardless

43:24

how difficult that might be or detained regardless how

43:26

difficult that might be and you under

43:28

you can understand why that is an effective

43:32

Message to a lot of voters about that.

43:34

We've lost control of the border if that's

43:36

the case There's also the the Biden administration

43:39

has admitted what? Democrats

43:41

used to not admit so much which is that there

43:43

are It's not only

43:45

the treatment of those who come to the

43:47

border and haven't You

43:50

know waited through the immigration process as

43:53

you're supposed to It's

43:56

not only works

44:00

politically the way you say, David, but also that it

44:02

is a draw for more people to come to the

44:04

border. So there are

44:06

pushes and pulls, and there's obviously the push

44:08

of the conditions in the countries that

44:11

a lot of these migrants come from.

44:13

But the Biden administration has also admitted

44:15

that there is a huge pull factor

44:18

to these policies that has increased the

44:20

numbers. Yeah,

44:22

and also the Biden administration is

44:24

dealing with Democratic mayors

44:26

and governors in states like New York

44:29

and elsewhere, where the

44:31

dynamics have changed because of these busloads

44:33

of people that Greg Abbott and Rhonda

44:35

Santos have been sending from the South,

44:37

right? I mean, in New

44:40

York City in particular, this is a real, this

44:43

is taking a real toll on city

44:46

services and figuring out what to do

44:48

with people, where they're gonna go, all

44:50

of this is a shared burden. And

44:53

I think that tactic, which, I mean, it

44:55

seemed kind of theatrical and started, it seemed

44:57

like a performance, but now it's really having

44:59

a political impact. And there is a kind

45:01

of like, well, you know, you

45:04

Democratic liberals, you said all these folks could show

45:06

up, but do you really want them taking over

45:09

your own city, this is what it feels like.

45:11

It's really interesting to watch that develop.

45:14

Incredibly effective. I

45:16

walk up and down in front of the vice president's

45:18

house and I would say

45:21

three times in the last three months I have

45:24

been there as a bus sent

45:26

up from Texas has arrived in front

45:28

of the vice president's house as people.

45:30

And you see these young women,

45:33

Latino, women mostly carrying

45:35

babies, just lined up outside. What,

45:37

you know, and there's a kind

45:39

of an infrastructure for people to come and

45:41

collect them, but it's just an amazing moment.

45:45

And I look, I

45:47

think what Abbott

45:49

did was wrong in that

45:51

he refused to coordinate with the

45:54

cities. He refused to give them a heads up.

45:56

It's very inhumane. That part of the humane. political

46:00

measure and as a way of alerting people to

46:02

what this means. I thought it was not

46:05

merely effective, but morally correct. I

46:07

think it was a very wise

46:10

thing that's been good for the

46:12

country to say, this is

46:14

what is happening. So we all have to

46:16

bear responsibility for it. How are we going

46:18

to do it? And to make sure that

46:20

then the governor of

46:23

Colorado and the mayor of Denver and

46:25

the mayor of New York and the

46:27

mayor of Philadelphia and the mayor of

46:29

Boston and Chicago, they all

46:31

have to think about this and

46:33

deal with it is real

46:35

and good. I mean, we haven't

46:38

resolved the problem. And if Republicans refuse

46:40

to negotiate a deal, then that sort

46:42

of moots a lot of it. But I

46:45

can't criticize Abbott for that piece of it. I

46:48

don't know. I mean, the means and

46:50

the ends, I feel like you can

46:52

separate here. Like he's doing it in

46:54

a way that's increasing suffering. And also

46:56

the Republicans don't seem interested in really

46:58

resolving the kind of fundamental problem we

47:00

have with our broken immigration system.

47:03

Obviously in Florida and Texas, they would

47:05

have it and others would say that

47:07

there's an equal moral component to the

47:09

failure of the federal system. But that,

47:11

of course, is no excuse for two

47:13

wrongs. Obviously, don't make a right. It

47:15

doesn't. While this

47:18

has been effective, it didn't have to be

47:20

effective and cruel to the people, to the

47:22

human souls that you're using

47:24

in your effective political move. Let's

47:29

go to cocktail chatter. Emily, when

47:32

you were having a vibe or

47:35

Rita with Mr. Baslan

47:37

on the porch of your vibe home in

47:39

vibe haven, what are you going to be

47:41

chattering about? Okay.

47:44

I approach this with trepidation, but

47:47

I'm not Sally force, though

47:49

I probably shouldn't. Sally. Sally forth.

47:51

That was a great newspaper

47:53

cartoon. I was going to say it wasn't that

47:55

a comic. I have

47:57

been following with interest South Africa.

48:00

charges of genocide against Israel for the conduct of

48:02

its war in Gaza. I am not going to

48:05

weigh in on the merits of any of that

48:07

because I'm just not. However,

48:09

I would like to recommend a piece

48:12

by Yatir Rosenberg in the Atlantic that

48:14

is just about some of the basic

48:16

facts here that I did not know.

48:19

Yatir's piece is called What Did Top

48:21

Israeli War Officials Really Say About Gaza?

48:24

And he shows that some of the

48:26

things that seemed most disturbing from the

48:29

Defense Minister Yoav Galant and

48:32

from Netanyahu were mistranslated and

48:34

misunderstood. And his piece I

48:36

think has prompted some corrections

48:39

in Bloomberg in particular and other

48:42

outlets. So to me it was a

48:44

relief to read this because it seemed

48:47

like the very worst things that

48:50

top Israeli officials said they were really talking

48:52

about Hamas, not all the

48:54

people in Gaza. Anyway, this is just

48:56

about the basic factual context. That's why

48:58

I'm recommending this piece in

49:00

the Atlantic by Yatir Rosenberg. That

49:04

wasn't that hard, Sally Forrest. I don't

49:06

even think you said Sally Forrest. I think you sort of

49:10

stepped delicately outside into the

49:12

snow, decided it was okay and kept

49:14

going. John, would

49:17

you like to Sally Forrest with a cocktail

49:19

chatter? Yes,

49:21

I am an absolute

49:24

perishing thirst for one, but it's

49:26

early in the morning. Cursive

49:29

is coming back to California schools. No

49:32

longer, it was not taught after 2010.

49:34

They're teaching kids cursive

49:37

again because as we all know those of

49:39

us who struggle

49:43

with retention and trying to stuff our

49:45

brains full of things that writing

49:47

down information by

49:50

hand sticks it

49:52

in the old brain pan more effectively. And

49:55

so now in California they have made

49:57

this a part of the curriculum again. So if you

49:59

would your own life and find yourself too addicted to

50:01

the keyboard, go get

50:04

a pencil and paper and

50:06

let the ideas really sink in.

50:09

I've often wondered, I would like to see a study

50:11

about whether the universality

50:13

of keyboards and texting

50:16

has increased literacy significantly. It seems like

50:18

it would be very hard to be

50:20

an illiterate person now in a way

50:22

that you could have been illiterate

50:25

for a long time because there wasn't, you didn't have

50:27

to be reading and writing all the time. But now

50:30

you almost everyone. Yeah, so many people text, right? Yeah,

50:32

but maybe they voice to text. I don't know, I'm

50:34

just curious about how that's affected it. Those

50:37

of you, I'm sure there are deaf listeners who are

50:40

hearing this who know the answer. My

50:42

chatter is about a great story in

50:45

the Washington Post by Eric Wemple, the

50:47

media reporter, and it's about a

50:50

particular street performer in downtown Washington.

50:52

Now, bear with me because I've

50:54

talked in the past, in

50:58

a recent episode about how the Washington

51:00

basketball team and hockey team, the Wizards and

51:02

the Capitals are being moved out of downtown

51:06

Washington, this arena in Washington, into Alexandria. It

51:08

is very likely to happen. The owner of

51:10

the company that owns the Caps and Wizards,

51:13

which is called Monumental Sports is named Ted

51:15

Leonces. Ted Leonces got

51:17

a good deal in Alexandria and also clearly

51:20

was irritated by what was happening downtown around

51:22

the arena where there was a sense of

51:25

disorder and the DC government wasn't

51:27

helping out a lot. And there

51:29

was crime increasing and he was just got frustrated

51:31

about it. And that seems

51:34

to have been a significant factor motivating

51:36

him to look for greener pastures outside

51:38

the city. So comes Wemple with a

51:40

really interesting story, which was totally not

51:43

a surprise to me for reasons I'll

51:45

get to, that there is there's been

51:47

a very annoying street performer in

51:50

gallery place where the arena, DC arena

51:52

is named David Halman,

51:55

who has two young kids who sing

51:57

and dance with him. Very

51:59

young. These kids should be in school

52:01

and they're or they shouldn't definitely shouldn't be as up as

52:03

late as they are and they have

52:06

heavily amplified music that resonates

52:09

all around a couple blocks right

52:12

in the heart of gallery place

52:14

and in fact right below the

52:16

monumental sports offices And

52:18

my girlfriend's office used to be across the

52:21

street and she would complain all the time

52:23

about how much noise this fucking thing made

52:25

And there her company in fact ended up

52:27

moving offices not entirely because

52:29

but like a little bit because it

52:31

was so annoying to be across from

52:33

this Performer people have been spending people

52:35

who live above this block have been

52:37

spending thousands of dollars to soundproof their

52:39

windows There's a restaurant

52:41

there Clyde's Which has

52:43

basically lost a ton of business because people

52:46

won't sit in the outdoor space Because

52:48

it's this music is pounding

52:50

pounding pounding and DC utterly failed

52:52

to stop it because noise Enforcement

52:54

in DC as in many cities

52:56

doesn't exist. They don't enforce it

52:58

after 5 p.m They

53:01

have a rule where they can't the noise inspector is

53:03

not allowed to ask for the name of the person

53:05

who's making the noise So you can't therefore

53:07

punish them there's no rule

53:09

against amplified music and

53:11

there's also been this movement in DC because

53:14

of there's a There's a

53:16

store in downtown DC that is famous for blasting

53:18

go-go music into the street And that's seen as

53:20

like cultural patrimony of DC and there was an

53:22

effort to sort of Silence the store because it

53:24

made a huge amount of annoying noise and then

53:27

a kind of movement to protect Go-go

53:29

music called don't mute DC came up and so

53:31

there's no ability to restrict

53:34

amplified music and I just thought this story

53:36

this and so what happened is Ted Leon

53:38

says and the people at monumental sports got

53:40

very annoyed by all this music and it

53:42

was a contributing factor And even if you

53:44

say this is like 1% Let's

53:46

just say you say it's 1% of the

53:48

reason that Ted Leon says move the Wizards

53:50

and Capitals out of DC that 1% is

53:53

probably worth 40 million dollars to the city every

53:55

year I mean it's worth an enormous amount of

53:57

money and Look,

54:00

we're old people now. Amplified

54:03

music, public amplified music is pollution.

54:06

It's pollution and it's invidious, it's

54:09

selfish, it's harmful, it seizes public

54:11

space for private gain. It

54:13

steals the right of people to have their own thoughts

54:15

and their own quiet. And it

54:18

costs any public space that has amplified music

54:20

that is not at a

54:22

decent volume and in controlled times and

54:24

in controlled areas is one that has

54:27

been damaged and polluted. And

54:30

cities have got to fix it and

54:32

DC has got to fix it because

54:34

this one person with these two kids

54:36

to perform with them has basically helped

54:38

contribute to the degradation of

54:41

the downtown of DC. So,

54:44

there, I'm going to stop there. Listeners,

54:46

you've got chatters. Keep

54:49

them coming. We

54:52

asked last week, you sent a great round of

54:54

them. Please keep sending them to us at gabfestatslate.com.

54:57

Our listener chatter this week comes from

54:59

Annie O'Connor and it's about the lockpicking

55:01

lawyer. Hi, Gabfest. This

55:03

is Annie O'Connor from St. Paul, Minnesota. I'm

55:05

recommending a YouTube channel called The Lockpicking Lawyer.

55:08

My husband introduced me to this channel after

55:10

researching bike locks and incidentally stumbling into internet

55:12

gold. I started watching these videos

55:14

during the COVID pandemic when I was working

55:16

in long-term care and desperately needed an outlet completely

55:19

separate from work. These videos showed a

55:21

problem with a clear solution from start to

55:23

finish and was immensely helpful after long days

55:25

of uncertainty. I highly recommend it

55:27

to others that either love minutia or simply need

55:29

a break after a stressful day. Enjoy. That's

55:32

our show for today. Our theme

55:34

music is by the American Giants. Ben Richmond is senior director for

55:36

podcast operations at Leishman, Montgomery is the VP of

55:38

audio and slate. Thanks for listening. Hi

56:04

Slate Plus, how are you? So

56:06

American journalism is having a really

56:08

terrible, terrible, terrible week. Pitchfork was

56:11

closed, folded into GQ, Sports Illustrated

56:13

appears to be laying off most

56:15

of its staff. Sports Illustrated already

56:17

a shell of itself has become

56:20

somehow even less of a shell. The Los

56:22

Angeles Times laid off 20% of

56:25

its staff, more than 100 journalists.

56:28

There's a tremendous amount

56:30

of anxiety across journalism.

56:34

Ezra Klein had a very good column listing some

56:36

of these. The Messenger

56:38

is reportedly out of money. Vox

56:41

Media has seen huge layoffs. Gawker

56:46

and The Onion, the company that owns the Gawker

56:48

and The Onion is trying to, and Defector

56:50

is trying to unload it because that's been a

56:54

problem. Popular Science Magazine has done. All

56:56

right, you can stop listing. Vice is

56:58

barely alive. Time has been laying people

57:00

off. So what's

57:02

going on? And can it be

57:04

stopped? Emily? I mean, I

57:06

think the larger dynamic that's been going on

57:09

for a while is the migration of

57:13

advertising dollars online to Facebook

57:15

and Google rather than to

57:17

purveyors of news and the

57:19

sort of change

57:21

in what used to

57:23

be bundling, right? Where you would have

57:26

news sources that had

57:29

a lot of in print days

57:31

display advertising and then they were

57:33

purveying news alongside of other lifestyle

57:35

coverage and it kind of subsidized

57:37

the news coverage. Digital

57:39

advertising, much smaller percentage of it

57:42

goes to news outlets and it

57:44

doesn't provide as

57:46

much revenue per ad. I

57:48

mean, this is a particular problem for local

57:50

and regional news, right? Which is the thing

57:52

that worries me the most in terms of

57:55

what we're actually losing. No

57:58

offense to Pitchfork. Pitchfork is great. But,

58:00

and it's like, it's a loss. I'm not

58:02

trying to, but the thing that seems like

58:04

a real problem for the democracy is

58:06

the lack of coverage in local

58:09

places. And we're

58:11

watching this dynamic take place

58:13

while a small

58:15

number of individual writers

58:18

are figuring out how to make a good

58:20

living and do really interesting work on sub-stack

58:22

and other forums like that that they can

58:25

charge for. The problem is that

58:27

you can't scale that kind of operation. You

58:30

have to have a really small publication,

58:32

if that's the right word for it,

58:34

that's really driven by one person's voice

58:37

and personality and just like brand. And

58:40

so what Ezra pointed to,

58:42

and I think he's right, is

58:44

that there are these small individually

58:46

run newsletters, et

58:49

cetera. And then there are some really

58:51

big news organizations, including the New York

58:53

Times, that seem to have figured out

58:55

how to provide the kind of bundling

58:57

that worked in the past. And then

58:59

what's getting squeezed out

59:02

are these mid-level local

59:05

regional news

59:08

outlets. And that is

59:10

a real loss. It's not like that

59:12

kind of reporting can't be improved on

59:14

because it can, having worked in a

59:16

newspaper like that. But it seems

59:18

like what is happening is a kind of race to the

59:20

bottom. And another just element of this is that some of

59:22

these outlets have been bought

59:24

up by hedge funds but then just

59:26

basically kind of rapaciously stripped

59:29

them of all value and killed them

59:32

off. The downside of course

59:34

also is not just, and

59:36

maybe this is implicit what you were saying Emily, is that you're

59:39

not only not covering what's happening at the local level,

59:41

but you're atrophying or

59:43

destroying the most direct connection between

59:45

the citizen and the information, which

59:47

builds muscles and restores the power

59:49

of the institution. So I trust

59:53

my local reporters because they tell it to me

59:56

that they're not going to be able to get it straight. And if

59:58

you have a sense of trust there, you

1:00:00

could go up the next step in believing a

1:00:03

news organization that's writing about national news. That

1:00:06

it's a better gateway drug to

1:00:08

institutional improvement than trying to get

1:00:11

good information from

1:00:14

national outlets because a lot of

1:00:16

national outlets have disappointed people. In

1:00:18

part because they're trying to chase the market

1:00:21

forces that we're describing here. And maybe certainly

1:00:23

in television news, television news

1:00:25

is always threatened

1:00:27

by having to be sufficiently

1:00:29

entertaining. We certainly have seen this

1:00:31

in coverage of presidential campaigns where

1:00:34

it's in everybody's interest to make it

1:00:36

entertaining. It's in the candidate's interest to make

1:00:39

it entertaining because who wants to go and listen to like

1:00:41

45 minutes on the Treaty of the Sea. And

1:00:43

it's on the television and

1:00:46

it's necessary to make it

1:00:48

entertaining because you're competing with other

1:00:50

entertainment offerings. Now you're competing with

1:00:53

millions of entertainment offerings because everybody can,

1:00:55

I mean including social media, TikTok. That

1:00:59

was just a snippet from our Slate Plus

1:01:01

conversation. If you want to hear the whole

1:01:03

conversation, go to slate.com plus

1:01:05

gabfest plus to become a member today.

1:01:08

Judy was boring. Hello. Then

1:01:10

Judy discovered chumbacassino.com. It's

1:01:13

my little escape. Now Judy's the

1:01:15

life of the party. Oh baby, mama's bringing

1:01:17

home the bacon. Whoa, take it easy

1:01:19

Judy. Chumba. The Chumba

1:01:21

life is for everybody. So go

1:01:23

to chumbacassino.com and play over 100

1:01:25

casino style games. Join today and

1:01:27

play for free for your chance

1:01:29

to redeem some serious prizes. Chumba.

1:01:32

chumbacassino.com. No purchase necessary. We were prohibited

1:01:34

by law. 18 plus terms and conditions

1:01:36

apply.