0:05

Welcome to Politicology. I'm Ron Steslow.

0:08

That's Mike Madrid. We're back today to

0:10

answer some of your questions. We had such a great

0:12

time the last time we did this. We thought we'd

0:14

do it more often. So we've

0:16

got some questions from our listeners. We've

0:19

got some comments and reviews we're going to talk

0:21

about. And

0:23

as many of you know already, Mike is

0:25

a senior advisor at the California Latino Economic

0:27

Institute. He's my fellow co-founder of the Lincoln

0:29

Project and is now a senior fellow at

0:32

the University of California at Irvine's School of

0:34

Social Ecology. Mike, great to see you.

0:36

Good morning. Great to be with you, man. I

0:38

love this format. I love doing this. Ever

0:41

since we met on the Lincoln Project

0:43

and started engaging folks and helping me answer questions,

0:45

I just love that that's a part of what

0:47

we do. And I love what you do here

0:49

with mail bags. So let's get on it. The

0:51

great thing is we would be doing this anyway,

0:53

I think. And so this is just an

0:56

excuse to do it in front of a microphone. But as

0:58

a matter of fact, we'll talk a little bit later about

1:01

the exchange we were having yesterday over

1:03

Christian supremacy. But we'll save that for a little later. Let's

1:07

dig in. Just so

1:09

the audience knows too, like what

1:11

you hear Ron and I talking about on political ecology

1:13

is the way we talk all the time. That

1:18

is what we do. We talk about all of this topic. It's

1:20

not like we're just doing it for an hour a week. It's

1:23

what we literally talk about. It's actually what we do.

1:27

Yeah. First

1:31

question is from Keith. Keith

1:33

L wrote in and said, Hi

1:35

Ron, long time listener, love the show. What

1:37

do you make of Lauren Boebert's move from

1:39

the third to fourth congressional district? From what

1:41

I understand, her new district is whiter, more

1:44

educated, and more Republican. I remember Mike Madrid

1:46

saying college educated voters at the dividing line

1:48

within the GOP in terms of being for

1:50

Trump or against him. The fourth district leans

1:52

27 points in the GOP's favor according to

1:54

a nonpartisan analysis of election results from 2016

1:56

to 2020 by staffers for the Colorado. the

2:00

federal legislature. Here's the question. Is

2:02

there any chance of a Democrat

2:04

upsetting Boebert here, or is that

2:06

a pipe dream? Any chance

2:08

that Boebert doesn't make it out of the

2:10

crowded field of GOP competitors? Look, Mike, you

2:13

have to hand it to political ecology listeners

2:16

when they write in because they are so

2:18

detailed with their questions. It's amazing.

2:21

What do you say to Keith? It

2:23

is a great question. So let me start

2:25

from the top level. The unfortunate thing about

2:28

Lauren Boebert moving is she

2:30

was vulnerable enough to be picked off

2:32

in her current seat, and she

2:34

would have lost to a Democrat. She

2:37

saw that. I think the Republican House

2:39

Conference saw that and said, you're going

2:41

to lose this seat. We've got a

2:43

problem here. And the writing

2:45

was kind of on the wall. So she made

2:47

the right move for her and for the House

2:49

Conference, which was get out of that seat, let

2:52

another Republican that doesn't have all of her baggage

2:55

and the seat that she's in and Republicans in

2:57

all likelihood, unless there's a big blue wave, we'll

3:00

be able to defend that seat. She did

3:02

go to, as Keith was right, she moved

3:04

to a more Republican seat. And

3:07

the answer to whether or not she can

3:09

go to the primary is really a function

3:11

of the composition of the primary electorate. The

3:13

more candidates in that field, the better chance

3:16

she has. Okay. Now let's assume

3:18

that she does get out. I don't think she will,

3:20

by the way, because I think as long as there's

3:23

three strong contenders she's

3:26

probably not going to be, she probably

3:28

won't get out. If she's,

3:30

if there's five or six, she

3:33

still has a much better chance. So the

3:35

more in that primary field, the better it

3:37

is for Boebert. But let's say she

3:39

does get out. It's so Republican.

3:41

It's kind of like Marjorie Taylor Greene's district

3:43

at that point is

3:45

she becomes so safe that it

3:47

doesn't matter. And even though

3:50

the educational levels are very different

3:52

than Marjorie Taylor Greene's, it's

3:54

still pretty hardcore Republican. Now

3:57

a lot of listeners were, you know, know

3:59

that Ron and I kind of specialize. to

4:01

talk a little about the defections of Republicans

4:03

in this transition that is changing. Got

4:06

to keep in mind, we're talking really marginal

4:08

numbers here. So in 2020, when we were

4:10

talking about Republican defections in the Bannon line

4:12

number, and again, every race has its own

4:14

dynamics, we were talking four to seven percent.

4:16

We obviously exceeded that, got nine percent of

4:19

Republicans to defect off of Trump. And

4:21

you see Trump barely

4:23

win, in large part

4:25

because of this Hispanic and African-Americans

4:28

shift rightward that happened in 2020,

4:30

offset the Republican defections. This

4:33

dynamic is a little bit different this year. And

4:35

what we're seeing is probably those shifts may

4:38

happen to a larger degree. Right

4:40

now, we're sitting at about a 15, 18

4:43

percent Republican saying, I won't vote for

4:45

Trump regardless. That's what Haley's

4:47

numbers were showing. And that number,

4:49

that dynamic is to me the key data

4:52

points to watch heading through 2024. Yeah,

4:55

the question is whether they're in the right

4:57

places, in the right battlegrounds. That's 100 percent

4:59

right. Yeah. And also- What's

5:02

California Republicans defecting? It doesn't matter. Yeah,

5:04

right. Yeah. And

5:06

also to that point about

5:08

not being competitive, we should know, I think it's north of 85

5:10

percent of districts now are so

5:13

uncompetitive that even, you know, the

5:15

race is the primary as this one will be.

5:18

And once you get to the general, they're

5:20

basically locked in. It's even half five percent.

5:22

Yeah, we're talking about the avian deficit. It

5:24

doesn't truly competitive see. Yeah.

5:27

Yeah. Yeah. Yeah.

5:30

Support for political comes from magic spoon. So

5:33

growing up, I don't know about you, but cereal

5:35

was one of the best parts of being a

5:37

kid for me. And in

5:39

recent years, as I've gotten more

5:41

serious about fitness and nutrition, you obviously have

5:44

to watch out for sugar and empty carbs.

5:46

And so I stopped eating it, stopped eating

5:48

it years ago. And then

5:50

at some point along the way, I found out about

5:52

a cereal called magic spoon. So I've known about these

5:54

guys since before they became a sponsor of political. Magic

5:58

spoon is high protein. cereal

6:00

with zero grams of sugar, and

6:03

it's like reinventing your childhood favorites. Their

6:06

variety pack has four flavors, including

6:08

cocoa, fruity, frosted, and peanut butter.

6:12

My favorite so far is the fruity

6:14

one. It's like that one cereal that's

6:16

shaped like loops and they're fruity. This

6:20

pack has zero grams of sugar, 13 to

6:23

14 grams of protein, and four to

6:26

five grams of net carbs, only 140 calories

6:28

per serving. Like I said, it's high

6:30

in protein, zero grams

6:32

of sugar, keto-friendly, gluten-free, grain-free,

6:35

and soy-free. So go to

6:37

magicspoon.com slash Ron to grab

6:39

a variety pack and try today. And

6:42

be sure to use our promo code Ron,

6:44

R-O-N, at checkout to save $5 off

6:47

your order. And Magic Spoon is so confident

6:49

in their product, by the way, it's backed

6:51

with a hundred percent happiness guarantee. So you

6:53

don't like it for any reason, they will

6:55

refund you your money. No questions asked. That's

6:58

magicspoon.com/Ron and use the code

7:00

R-O-N to save $5 off.

7:05

Moving on, Matthew

7:07

O asks, why

7:10

does no one ever mention attrition when it

7:12

comes to the 2024 election? Since the last

7:14

election, we have

7:17

four years worth of young people entering

7:19

voting age. And in theory, four

7:21

years of the oldest people who voted

7:24

in 2020 passing away. I realize

7:26

getting 18 to 22 year olds to turn out isn't

7:29

easy, but surely this shift since 2016

7:31

will have at least some impact. If

7:34

most older people lean to Trump,

7:36

won't there be an impact? And

7:38

I think Mike, this invokes our recurring

7:40

discussion of shifting demographics, the loss

7:43

of Republican voters after 2020 and

7:46

the election subversion, January 6

7:48

politics? Yeah, that's

7:50

a great question. So here's some basic math on

7:52

that. Every day in America, 10,000 people turn 18

7:54

years old and are eligible to vote. And on

7:56

that same

8:00

day 7,500 people

8:02

die in America, most of them older,

8:05

not all of them. But those numbers

8:07

compounded every day over

8:10

four years can make a very

8:12

significant, sizable impact. But here's

8:14

the funny thing about attrition is

8:16

every day, everybody gets older. So

8:18

you have younger voters also

8:20

moving into a different life cycle and

8:23

becoming older voters and their voting patterns

8:25

change. And that's one of the funny

8:27

things and the beautiful things about political demography

8:30

is none of this really happens in a

8:32

vacuum, right? You can hear this crazy guy

8:34

Mike Madrid talking about a ban in line

8:36

and this is the number that you need

8:38

of Republicans or some people say this is

8:40

how much Latino vote or female vote or

8:42

African American vote. There's a lot

8:44

of truth to that from the models that we're looking

8:46

at. But none of these, any one of these, nothing

8:49

happens in a vacuum. Right. Exactly. So

8:51

I love

8:54

modeling, but I'm, and I'm

8:56

one of the few political consultants that still literally

8:59

sits down with like pen and paper and

9:01

will model and like write out the math

9:03

and, and attack these questions that were just

9:06

asked. But the truth is that

9:08

they're very good guides. But because

9:11

the electorate is dynamic, every, all of

9:13

these things are moving. There is moving

9:15

much less than a hyper-partisanized environment, but

9:17

they're still moving. And so

9:19

we've got to be mindful that yes, attrition

9:22

is births and deaths, but

9:24

everybody in America is also moving up

9:26

every day, the age calendar. And there

9:28

are that, that demographically changes

9:30

the equation as well. Yeah. Good

9:32

question though. These are smart questions.

9:34

Okay. This was about former

9:36

Trump supporters. So in December, our friend

9:39

George Conway was on C-SPAN and he was

9:41

asked about his support for Trump in 2016.

9:43

And he said, and I'll quote George, I

9:45

was confused by Donald Trump. I'm ashamed. I

9:47

supported him in 2016. It was a mistake

9:50

of judgment, a mistake of moral judgment. I

9:53

want to make amends for that. And

9:55

at the show, this show,

9:57

we love George. We know he's been

9:59

through. and he's sacrificed a lot

10:02

for speaking out against Donald Trump

10:04

and for sounding alarm bells He's

10:06

not the only former Trump supporter in that

10:08

boat and recently we've talked on

10:10

the show about former administration officials raising the

10:13

alarm About the lawyers for example

10:15

Trump is looking to hire to a second

10:17

term basically to do his bidding Regardless

10:19

of the law regardless of what the courts may

10:21

think As

10:23

just one component of his day one plan And

10:27

so last week Mike on the roundup

10:30

You mentioned the observation that it

10:32

seems more and more Republicans are beginning

10:34

to find their voice on this And

10:38

I was wondering if you have anyone is anyone specific

10:40

you have in mind or what brought

10:42

that observation? To mind

10:44

I have really wrestled

10:46

with this personally

10:50

Professionally and even

10:52

spiritually, okay, let me explain why

10:54

yeah Never Trump era

10:56

and there's not a whole lot of us out there

10:59

with you know, when we all talk we all know

11:01

who we're talking about There were

11:03

kind of the some of the OGs right the original

11:05

like you and I were there like the man moment

11:07

He came down the stairs and we were never there

11:09

Yeah There are guys like Conway who voted for him

11:11

at 16 and thought that he could you know get

11:14

better and you know And then changed for the 2020

11:16

election There's now people that

11:18

were with him two times and are saying, you know, I

11:20

can't do it again and People

11:23

in the administration who have now a whole bunch

11:25

of people from the administration who've said Tell

11:28

me look the people in the administration give

11:30

me the most tortured complex about this I

11:32

want to explain why and George's

11:34

language is extremely important now This this a

11:36

lot of this you can dismiss as just

11:38

Mike Madrid stuff, but this is the way

11:40

that I see it Yeah, the

11:43

danger in the rise of Trump was not

11:45

that he's a crazy man And if there's

11:47

a third of the population 40% of the

11:49

population that will love him and run off a cliff for him

11:53

That that is concerning But it was never

11:55

as alarming to me as the enabling class

11:57

that allowed it that knew that it was

12:00

wrong, but were not willing

12:02

to sacrifice life, treasure, money,

12:05

contract status to

12:07

do what they knew was right.

12:09

That was the danger. So

12:12

here's the language that George used that was very

12:15

important because I'm not as accepting as most, a

12:17

lot of people are of people who are just

12:19

saying, come on in, we'll welcome everybody and everybody's

12:21

numbers, which is a little bit odd as a

12:23

political campaign guy. It's like, maybe you ought to

12:25

take them in. To me, if

12:27

you take in the bad people

12:30

that are the weakest spined, yellow

12:33

bellied cowards that allowed it to happen in

12:35

the first place, you're not really solving the

12:37

problem. And I acknowledge, fully acknowledge my own

12:39

personal limitations in that. But

12:41

Conway said, I am making amends

12:44

for what I did.

12:47

That is what we call, at

12:49

least in the Catholic tradition, an act

12:51

of contrition. It means not only am

12:54

I saying, I'm sorry, I'm doing something

12:56

about it. That person is

12:59

deserving of forgiveness, regardless of

13:01

the sin. And I've been

13:03

lambasted on this on social media and saying, could

13:06

you forgive Trump? Of course I

13:08

could forgive Trump. If he was

13:10

genuinely sorry, if he was genuinely

13:13

sorry and said, I want to make

13:15

amends to make this better, I believe

13:18

in my tradition that God's

13:20

love is so enormous. If God's going to

13:23

forgive him, who am I not to forgive him? Right? But

13:26

the act of saying, I am sorry

13:28

for what I did is the beginning

13:31

point. And without that,

13:33

you're not changing anything, in my

13:35

opinion, you're just an opportunist. And

13:37

there's a lot of former Trump

13:39

people that are getting book deals

13:42

and book contracts and TV

13:44

appearances and shows that have never said, I'm

13:46

sorry for what

13:48

I did. You will hear them sometimes

13:50

say, I'm sorry I could make Trump

13:53

a better man. Or

13:55

even Chris Christie, who says, I'm

13:57

sorry that I, you know, I'm sorry that

13:59

I, I tried as hard as

14:02

I could to make him an adult. It's

14:04

like, you were too smart for that.

14:06

You knew what was going on. You're

14:08

not accepting your own actions that made

14:10

this country worse. And I

14:13

will forgive you once you acknowledge what

14:15

we both know to be true, because

14:17

that's what I believe. But until that

14:19

act of contrition takes place, all

14:22

I'm doing is enabling another opportunist to do

14:24

what Donald Trump did and empower him even

14:26

more. So I've got

14:28

this real problem with people. Like I

14:30

said, Stephanie Grisham has said, I am

14:32

sorry. I will do whatever it can,

14:35

I take. George Conway, I'm sorry.

14:37

He said it again. He says it regularly.

14:41

I want to make amends. I'm sorry.

14:43

I made a mistake that hurt this

14:45

country. And I'm going to do something

14:47

to make it better, an act of

14:49

contrition. Most of these new

14:52

never Trumpers are never, no, they're

14:54

not saying- They were sometimes Trumpers

14:57

and now they're never Trump. They're

15:00

going where the advantage is. Yeah, there's

15:02

a range here. There's a

15:04

range here. There's a range from

15:06

reputation laundering to I

15:09

genuinely want to correct course that I was

15:11

a part of setting. Yeah.

15:13

And there's a wide range here.

15:15

Now, I think that

15:18

you have to look at this question, I think, for different

15:21

purposes. The

15:23

one you're articulating now, I think is a moral one. There's

15:26

also a political one. And if you

15:28

look at this through a political lens, even

15:30

the people like Chris Christie, who I think

15:32

are glossing over what they did in an

15:34

attempt to appear more consistent in their position

15:36

than they ever were, which is what

15:38

politicians do. And

15:41

yet he's politically useful. If

15:44

you aim him in the right direction, he's politically useful. I

15:46

would say the same for someone like Bill Barr, who said,

15:48

quote, someone who engaged in that kind

15:51

of bullying about a process that is fundamental to

15:53

our system and to our self-government

15:55

shouldn't be anywhere near the Oval Office, end quote.

15:57

Also, Bill Barr worked for him, right? I

16:00

appreciate these things and quotes like

16:02

that are politically powerful, they're useful. Yes.

16:05

And so you have to look at this through, I think, different lenses.

16:08

You do. And I try

16:10

to. And George Conway is actually very good

16:12

at this. George is very accepting of everybody

16:14

saying, we need them in the fight. Okay.

16:16

Yeah. Like we're this ragtag group of

16:19

rebels, give this guy a musket and turn him on and who cares?

16:22

Just let him shoot and doesn't have to be a good guy for the moment

16:24

we're in this existential fight. He's

16:26

right. He's absolutely right. But

16:28

what I'm saying is I don't want to forget

16:30

who these people are. I'm under no false illusion

16:32

that these are the people that allowed this to

16:34

happen in the first place. Cassidy

16:36

Hutchinson. I'm sorry. You

16:38

know, you're not a hero. You're

16:41

not. I'll say it, get her on the show

16:43

and we'll have this conversation. You're not a hero.

16:45

Useful. Also not a hero. With the

16:47

frog griffin, same bucket. Exactly. Both of

16:49

them. It's like you turned on him

16:51

when you were facing jail time because

16:53

of all the bad shit you did

16:55

up until this point. Oh, that

16:57

makes you a hero. And if we

17:00

make that a hero in this country, in this

17:02

society, it explains the rise of Trumpism. It explains

17:04

why a guy like Trump can be the president

17:06

of the United States. So yeah.

17:09

Okay. Keep

17:11

saying what you're saying. You'll make millions of

17:13

dollars by being an opportunist. I guess that's

17:15

fine. That's what we reward in this society.

17:18

But I'm not saying that what you're doing is

17:20

okay. What you've done,

17:22

you need to make amends for what

17:24

you've done. I've never met, I've never met Stephanie. I

17:27

have a conversation with her, but she has said, I don't

17:30

deserve to make money off of

17:33

what I did because what I did

17:35

was bad. That person

17:37

is genuinely sorry. If

17:39

you're on The View or if you're

17:41

getting a multi seven figure book deal

17:43

and have never apologized for your actions,

17:45

you're just saying, let me warn you

17:48

about democracy and the threat of it.

17:50

And she's like 26 years old warning

17:53

us about democracy after she spent 95%

17:55

of her career undermining

17:57

it. And somehow we

17:59

valorize that. that.

18:01

That is a sign of weakness in a society

18:03

that doesn't have a moral standard. And look, I'm

18:05

not here to moralize and say I'm better than

18:08

everybody else. Far from that. I don't

18:10

meet that far at all, but at least

18:13

I'm honest about acknowledging that. That's the point.

18:16

I think you have to ask them, what did

18:18

it cost you? What

18:20

did it cost you? And I think if

18:22

that equation is sort of positive, then

18:24

it's kind of obvious ambition was your

18:27

North Star, not morality. Yes.

18:29

And like I said, I don't begrudge these

18:31

people doing what they're doing. But when I

18:33

read Tim Miller's book about why we did

18:36

it, and the last profile person is Alyssa

18:38

Griffin, I was like, why is this sticking

18:40

with me so wrong? And because she is

18:42

absolutely no contrition. She never has

18:44

said, I'm sorry for what I did. I'm

18:47

sorry that I woke up every day advancing

18:49

Donald Trump's agenda to move the country to

18:51

where it is at this point. Her

18:54

only her only admonition to herself is,

18:56

oh, after January six, I couldn't do

18:58

it. That was the moment like everything

19:00

up until that was okay. And

19:02

the fact that I was the moment you got off

19:04

the bus, then when you when she was in the

19:06

room when those conversations were happening, like come on, stop

19:08

it. Like you just woke up and act and all

19:10

of a sudden it happened. This shit

19:13

got part of the buzz and suddenly she had

19:15

an addiction. She was driving the message

19:17

on all that. Like I said, I'm not here

19:19

to judge her. But that doesn't mean I have

19:22

to walk blind eyed into something and say,

19:24

Oh, oh, yeah, they're on the good side.

19:26

So it was just bilateral, you know, conflict

19:29

that we're in. While that's

19:31

true. There's a bigger moral, spiritual,

19:33

ethical dilemma the country faces that

19:35

allowed this to happen in the

19:38

first place, where opportunists are the

19:40

ones that are rewarded. And until

19:43

we change that, we're never going to

19:45

get anywhere. With George Conway is a

19:47

perfect example. He lost a lot, folks.

19:49

I lost a lot in this. Okay,

19:52

but he's standing up for doing what he is

19:54

right to meet at George. And again,

19:57

I'm a big fan and he's a dear friend. But

20:00

he's also somebody that I admire

20:02

greatly for what he has

20:04

lost for doing the

20:06

right thing and for his country,

20:08

including acknowledging his failings publicly.

20:12

It is extraordinary. You

20:14

make a great biography. It's so cool.

20:16

Without caveat, without any butts, like it's

20:18

just- And that's it. He's a good

20:20

man. Yeah, once there's butts, it's not

20:23

a genuine apology. Like being sorry, we

20:25

all make mistakes, every single one of

20:27

us. Me, you know, out

20:29

there too. I will apologize and have apologized for

20:31

things that I've done in my career, in my

20:33

personal life, my professional life. And I'm sure I'll

20:35

keep doing it. Like I said, I'm not

20:38

here to moralize. But what I am to

20:40

say is, as an observer of what is

20:42

wrong with American culture, is

20:45

we don't have the

20:47

capacity to realize that

20:49

contrition is a virtue.

20:53

Anyone who's ever actually interrogated

20:55

the question for themselves of

20:58

what makes a good apology, or

21:00

what is a true, a sincere

21:02

apology, knows that there's

21:04

never a but. You just stop. You

21:07

just, contrition

21:09

is not an explanation. Exactly,

21:12

not a qualifier either. There's no

21:14

qualifiers. There's no qualifiers. I'm sorry.

21:17

I did something wrong. But, but,

21:19

but, but, but, no, no, no. I did something wrong.

21:22

And, and I love the way George

21:24

does it. I'm here to make amends.

21:27

Like I'm not just sorry. I

21:30

could go make a gazillion dollars a year

21:32

as a lawyer, but no, I'm gonna spend

21:34

all of my time, effort, and life energy

21:36

making up for what I did. And now

21:38

what can we do? A bad judgment, by

21:40

the way. He was not looking to go

21:42

make more money. He's making plenty

21:44

of money before this. He's

21:46

a man of extraordinary integrity. Yeah.

21:50

Okay, let's just linger on this for just a

21:52

moment longer, because I just wanna kind of tease

21:54

out how important

21:57

these voices are. Looking

21:59

at this to the... political ends. Okay, let's set

22:01

them the moral question aside, which

22:03

is deep and real, and

22:05

is a far more systemic problem, I think,

22:08

in American culture. Through a political

22:10

lens, how important are these voices going

22:12

to be in trying to peel off more Trump

22:14

voters in 2024? Or

22:16

has that sort of ship sailed? Are these voices

22:19

all that...

22:23

I consider them useful, but I really

22:25

don't know how useful they will be. And I think it depends

22:27

on who they are and how many of them there are. Look,

22:31

the more the merrier, I guess, right? And that's the way

22:33

you got to look at it. Do

22:36

these voices, are they moving the needle

22:38

in any measurable way? No. They

22:40

are creating space

22:44

for others to stop and reflect and say, okay,

22:46

there are other people that have come to this

22:48

conclusion too. It's not just me. And

22:50

I'm convinced that that is what is required. So

22:54

like I said, everybody who

22:56

is making amends, God

22:58

bless you, come on over, join the team,

23:00

grab a musket, but you're going to the

23:02

front lines. You've got a special role that

23:04

you've got to play

23:07

here. I was under no false illusion

23:09

that Chris Christie was helping this effort.

23:11

I think he was actually hurting it

23:13

when he got into the primary, because

23:15

what he was really doing was mobilizing

23:17

the Trump base against what we were

23:19

doing. And I think he

23:21

would have been far more powerful if

23:23

he had been contrite and explained why

23:25

he did what he did, because that's

23:28

something that would have appealed to people

23:31

who aren't, you know, the average voter isn't

23:33

like, gosh, I feel really terrible about voting

23:35

for Donald Trump. There are some of those,

23:37

you've met some of those on the path.

23:39

And some of those people, those have already

23:42

turned. The question now becomes, can we finally

23:44

say as more and more voices come out,

23:46

is it my time for reckoning? Is it

23:48

my time for questioning? First of all,

23:51

this last weekend, I had a very long talk with

23:53

a man I've met on my very first

23:55

campaign back in 1992.

23:58

We've been very, very dear friends ever since. And

24:02

we stopped talking during my time with the Lincoln

24:04

Project and during the Trump era. I have some

24:06

eyes. Yeah, our relationship has

24:08

crashed and we have a stronger personal

24:10

relationship than a professional relationship. And we

24:14

weren't able to talk anymore. We have

24:16

since fixed that. But through the course of

24:18

that, and I think I shared with you, I don't mean to be

24:20

going on so long here on the Mail Magus actually, because I want

24:22

to get into questions, but we had

24:24

lunch with a man named Stu

24:26

Spencer this past Sunday. Stu Spencer

24:28

is 97 this month and

24:30

he asked to meet with the two of

24:32

us. He met us 25 years ago

24:34

as young Latinos in the business. And

24:37

Stu Spencer was the political consultant for

24:39

Ronald Reagan. He

24:42

got Reagan elected governor in California and

24:44

became one of the really the first

24:46

modern political consultant.

24:49

And I wanted to

24:51

go because I knew the dynamics of the three

24:53

of us having this conversation because

24:56

I knew Stu is

24:58

very anti-Trump. And I wanted

25:00

to see what it was like for a 97 year old man who

25:02

really helped build the modern Republican Party.

25:04

How does he feel about where things are

25:06

at? And he had

25:08

some remarkable insight where he basically

25:11

didn't know where he knew where I

25:14

was at on this, but he was expressing

25:16

deep reservations, not just as a Republican, not

25:19

just as a man who was really kind of the

25:21

last keeper of Reagan's flame in terms of

25:24

legacy. It's somebody who knew and guided him

25:26

at a personal level, but for the country.

25:28

And say how deeply,

25:30

deeply corrosive and destructive we

25:32

are this moment with

25:34

this man in this moment

25:37

in American history. And later on that

25:39

day I could see the change

25:42

in my friend who was

25:44

like, you know, maybe

25:48

I've been wrong about this. From a Titan

25:50

in the profession. Yeah. That's

25:54

what it took, right? But it

25:56

is one by one, brick by

25:59

brick. drip by drip. And I

26:01

think when it's so hard for people like you

26:03

and I who've been in this fight beginning and

26:05

have seen such little progress, we get tired, we

26:07

get demoralized, we get cynical, we just want to

26:09

throw up our hands and say, y'all are rotten.

26:11

But then another brick falls. Like if you had

26:14

told me in 2016, 2017 that Liz Cheney would

26:16

join the effort, I would have been like,

26:20

no way. And yes, there

26:22

she is. And then the Adam Kinzinger's and

26:25

the Chris Christie's, like it

26:27

happens brick by brick. And so as

26:29

a practitioner, as like you said, as

26:31

a political calculation, each voice adds to the

26:33

chorus, it gets louder, you may not be

26:36

able to hear it amongst

26:38

the din, but it is getting louder.

26:40

Yes. I think this goes back to the question you

26:44

so I think elegantly put on the

26:46

roundup last week, we were talking about

26:48

AI, but this is a far more deeper

26:51

question in in all of this

26:54

chaos and the decline of the Republican Party, who are you? Who

26:57

will you be? Right? And I think

26:59

watching watching people answer that question

27:01

in their own way is it's

27:04

it's a pull. And we're

27:06

all on our own path and trying to

27:08

do our own thing with it. And I

27:10

don't judge that I remember being when we

27:12

were being filmed in the documentary, Lincoln Project

27:14

documentary, George and you and I, Jeff and

27:16

Horne were in the same room and and and

27:19

Fisher Stevens asked us, you know, Mike,

27:22

I'm the last Republican, I'm still a Republican. And

27:24

the question is, like, how how can you still

27:26

be? I was like, is

27:28

field raking at it? I haven't changed. And

27:30

I'm not moving. A lot of things that

27:33

I view wrong about the Catholic Church. I

27:35

mean, I've stopped being a Catholic because of

27:38

the Orthodoxy. There's a lot of things wrong

27:40

with America. But I'm still an American. Right?

27:42

Right. And that's a there

27:44

aren't people who make their own equal judgments about

27:46

how to address it differently. Yourself

27:49

or Jennifer or George saying I'm out, I don't

27:51

want to be affiliated with these people. I get

27:53

that 100 percent. Or do your thing. My calling

27:59

right now is is to be

28:01

here to be this voice in

28:03

the party of Frederick Douglass, the party

28:05

of Abraham, party of Thaddeus

28:08

Stevens that says, this meant something

28:10

in American history. This party, whatever

28:12

it becomes, meant something.

28:15

And I will keep fighting

28:17

for that until I'm done. And then when

28:19

I'm done, I'll be laughing and shutting out

28:21

the lights and I'm okay with that's my

28:23

role. Okay,

28:29

let's move on. This is from a

28:32

couple of weeks ago. I had Alex

28:34

Thompson on from Axios, who was a great on

28:36

the roundup. And his look at his story was

28:38

that we are expecting to

28:40

get a report from the special

28:42

counsel investigating the mishandling of classified documents

28:45

by President Biden when he left

28:47

the White House as VP.

28:50

One of the things he said is

28:52

that we might get the equivalent of

28:54

a Mar-a-Lago photo of documents in Biden's

28:56

garage. We don't know, but he

28:58

thinks that's likely possible.

29:01

So we've talked before about this sort of

29:06

crime-ing theme, sort of corruption as

29:08

a theme, which I think is

29:10

now completely saturated and bipartisan. Trump's

29:13

been trying to push this idea that they're the

29:15

same. That's part of why he wants Biden to

29:17

be impeached, he says. Question

29:22

is, does this all come out in a wash? Let's say

29:24

we do get this photo and it's equivalent to

29:28

what we saw in the photos

29:30

of the Mar-a-Lago documents. No,

29:33

I'm not saying it is equivalent, but optically, there's

29:35

gonna be a lot of spin and say, well,

29:37

he did exactly the same thing. Politically, does this

29:39

come out in the wash? Do

29:42

you think any of this

29:44

ends up being impactful? I don't think it's impactful.

29:48

I think it's gonna, you know, it's not helpful, but

29:53

it's not, people have drawn their conclusions and they've-

29:55

They've brought a news cycle, so yeah. Yeah,

30:00

you know, one of the things I wrote in

30:02

this book, and we'll be talking a lot more

30:04

about the book coming up, and one of the

30:06

few people, you're probably one of them too, that

30:09

publicly called for

30:12

Bill Clinton to be impeached and or

30:14

resigned because of his indiscretions. And

30:17

I publicly called for Donald Trump's

30:19

public indiscretions to have him,

30:21

either resign or be impeached. I'm

30:23

proud of that, by the way. We're

30:26

like 1% of the population that's this.

30:29

Everyone else equivocates for their own tribe or for

30:32

their own side. Oh, you know, it was all-

30:34

George is a great example of this. Yeah.

30:38

I mean, yeah. Oh, it wasn't really, you know, you can't impeach

30:40

him because of what he was doing in the Oval Office of

30:42

the Mount of Poliski. It's like, no, that's not what it was.

30:44

It's too many perjury. It's what happened. Yeah. Like,

30:46

he lied under oath. Like, the law matters. And

30:49

if it matters, and so to

30:51

watch like women's groups, sorry, I know that

30:53

your viewership's going to get probably pissed off,

30:55

but to watch women's groups fall over themselves,

30:57

to defend themselves and act like this wasn't

31:00

a thing, and to paper over it, and

31:02

protect your tribe and put up walls, and

31:04

Hillary Clinton leading the charge to destroy Monica

31:06

Lewinsky. Like, this is really bad nefarious, ugly

31:09

behavior, right? But it happened. And

31:11

the Democrats did that. And they rallied despite evidence,

31:13

despite the truth, despite the law, to protect their

31:15

guy. Then Republicans do it, right?

31:17

And they were like, how can he possibly do that?

31:19

It's like, you guys just did it a couple of

31:21

administrations ago. Like, if it's wrong,

31:23

it's wrong. If it's not, then all is

31:26

fair. And so when I

31:28

see something like Biden, you know, and pictures

31:30

with, you know, classified

31:32

documents in the passenger seat of his Corvette,

31:35

in the garage, I'm like, that's not okay.

31:37

It's not. It's not. It's

31:40

not. It's also a false equivalency to say, you

31:42

know, one is okay than the

31:44

others. It should be a

31:47

matter of one was Russian nuclear secrets, and one was

31:49

about, you know, you were doing your

31:51

homework on the on the conflict in Eritrea.

31:53

Like it doesn't matter. Like, doesn't matter. There

31:56

are degrees of sin. There are degrees of law.

31:58

There are degrees of malfeasance. and we should have

32:01

those discussions. But don't tell me that it's just

32:03

okay that Joe Biden did it because you trust

32:05

him more, because he's the leader of your tribe.

32:07

Like that's not okay. Yeah, yeah, not okay. I

32:09

will say, I have

32:12

noticed that every, among my

32:14

sort of fun group, vast

32:16

majority of the Democrats I talk to, especially the Democrats who work

32:18

in politics are like, yeah, Bill Clinton,

32:20

we're really not proud of. And like, they

32:22

will say that, like, we think he shouldn't

32:24

be involved right now. It's kind of, okay,

32:26

yeah, retail politician, but that legacy stinks. We

32:29

don't like it, right? We're not, we

32:31

don't want that on us. So, yeah.

32:33

It's remarkable now, now. Yeah, well now,

32:35

exactly. All after the

32:37

Me Too movement, right? Now when it's convened, it's like,

32:39

oh yeah, I don't know. It's

32:41

remarkable that Bill Clinton, who was heralded as

32:44

the greatest of his generation, is

32:47

completely absent from the scene. Like,

32:49

just, his business completely got away

32:51

from the guy because it's indefensible.

32:53

It's indefensible then, by the way,

32:56

people. It was indefensible then. In

32:58

fact, it's, we're willing to do it. Should

33:00

give you some insight objectively into why

33:02

Republicans are doing what they're doing with

33:04

Donald Trump. It's not a false equivalency.

33:06

I'm not saying they're the same. I

33:09

am saying they both broke the law,

33:11

but I am saying, consider your own

33:13

rationale. If you defended Bill Clinton, despite

33:16

the evidence, despite his own

33:18

words, despite his own testimony,

33:20

despite all of it,

33:22

if you were defending a perjurer, you

33:26

need to take a little self inventory. That's

33:28

all I'm saying. Just take a look in the

33:30

mirror and be like, okay. Maybe

33:33

in my own little way, as part of the

33:35

problem. That doesn't mean you can't have an active

33:37

petition and go forward, but you're part of the

33:39

problem. But I think that introspection's really important if

33:41

you wanna be a sincere sort of participant in

33:43

what we're doing here, right? If you wanna be

33:46

a tribalist, then fine. You can be a tribalist.

33:48

It doesn't take a lot of brain cells to

33:50

do that. You know what I mean?

33:52

If you want to engage sincerely As

33:55

yourself in this process of politics,

33:57

which is just a fancy word

33:59

for... How we're going to

34:01

organize our lives years? Yeah, then

34:03

place the off bit, be sincere,

34:05

be authentic, but like. What?

34:08

Is it what is it will doing here

34:10

Own your actions? Yes it does such a

34:12

good way to put it and as after

34:14

that puts you at a disadvantage by rights.

34:16

I think the I think it actually makes

34:18

in in Progress farm or yes exactly it

34:20

doesn't put you at a disadvantage is because

34:22

republicans may fight to that way. well we're

34:24

gonna yell the a year he was he

34:27

debase herself to the point of of of

34:29

of the debasing that made your enemies your

34:31

enemies in the first place. What have you

34:33

won. By Steve Smith or

34:35

it will you be willing. This is exactly

34:37

This is exactly how I was explaining it

34:39

to my friends, my family, my colleagues and

34:41

twenty sixteen. When college you're in a loss.

34:43

Donald Trump it. I was like okay. Besides

34:45

the guy that I mouse. I'm not

34:48

doing this or my republican clients. Yeah.

34:50

I said if you. Have. To

34:53

sell your soul to. When. I don't

34:55

think you can to call that a victory, and I

34:57

think that's I'm. Saying. Is some

34:59

of but that's money right now.

35:01

He lost in. L

35:04

A Cyber realism limits actually First much

35:06

thoughts that looks like about easier off

35:08

as easy as know first that want

35:10

to talk about the as wise or

35:13

gets a world war before we did

35:15

us first redoing W Door Smith. Know.

35:18

A. Question is obvious or

35:21

backgrounds. Ah last week and we should

35:23

say ask for much ado. Abiding

35:25

locked up. Finally, the endorsement. Awesome

35:28

United Auto Workers! He made an unprecedented

35:30

move, stepped in and side with the

35:32

U A W when they were striking.

35:35

Or but the actual rank and file members

35:37

of the Way to Be You are obvious

35:39

Not a monolith. About a third of them

35:41

voted for Trump and sixteen And twenty Twenty.

35:43

I'm sort of. This is. How.

35:47

The. Physicists invokes a lot of previous and the

35:49

seasons I'm thinking of Now I'm But as we

35:51

think about. He. Influence and weight of

35:53

a union indoors in the context of this

35:56

realignment of working class voters who. actually

35:58

make up ah union

36:00

members and I think you have

36:02

to think about geography and battlegrounds here because

36:05

we're talking about Michigan, Pennsylvania, Wisconsin when Probably

36:08

we're going to be looking toward Arizona

36:11

Arizona and Georgia

36:14

in 2024 so What's

36:18

this endorsement worth really? It's

36:21

not what I'm laughing because

36:23

I saw the best tweet in a long time.

36:26

Sorry Yeah about

36:28

this saying it's remarkable that Joe

36:30

Biden an Irish Catholic president whose

36:32

greatest legislative accomplishment is called

36:34

the IRA Got his

36:36

biggest endorsement from a guy named Sean

36:39

Fane Who heads the

36:41

UAW? Rogers

36:43

by the way brilliance tweets

36:45

just brilliant, right? Yeah,

36:48

so set that aside for a moment Look

36:53

I think the UAW endorsement

36:55

is a big deal because of Michigan

36:58

You know, it's slowly slipping into play

37:01

and you know, Donald Trump

37:03

had a huge opportunity to go in

37:05

there and start making inroads During

37:09

those Connors tweet Mike. Yes.

37:11

I bet you things up. That was

37:13

Connor. Yeah Really Connor

37:18

Rogers who is on on the digital

37:20

team at the Lincoln project in 2020

37:23

and yeah, sorry I respect the president

37:25

passes the IRA and big staff Sean

37:28

Fane As

37:30

hilarious just beautiful. Anyway,

37:33

um Look

37:36

the the last the the last

37:38

really strong Messengers

37:42

for Democrats in

37:45

this educational separation this educational

37:47

divide that's happening in the

37:49

country is extraordinarily important To

37:53

Hold the line candidly. It's not really

37:55

to grow that base. They're losing it

37:58

very quickly and this. The

38:00

were overwhelmingly get a white workers

38:02

in the rust belt states. Are

38:04

still got a matter of place like

38:06

Michigan and in Wisconsin right where these

38:08

deserve. These are marginal places. a marginal

38:10

victories but you brought appointed to seventy.

38:13

Map is changing and it's changing. Your

38:15

was a reason why we went after

38:17

Arizona and Georgia was not because of

38:19

of unions and union strikes. We. Went

38:21

there because a white collar hi tech workers

38:23

had the moving in there for a long

38:25

time is why North Carolina I think is

38:27

probably one of really truly are unique states

38:29

that biden to play offs and sense in

38:32

this election cycle is not because it's an

38:34

old South. say it looks a lot like

38:36

Georgia with. Financing. Biotech and

38:38

and and hi tech jobs and all

38:40

the white collar workers out of the

38:42

in their wife workers overwhelmingly by the

38:44

way to bring your kind of a

38:46

financially conservative, socially more progressive you of

38:49

the world's due to the states in

38:51

the South. And A sees northern

38:53

states a rust belt states. New. Hampshire's

38:55

a good example New Hampshire, Wisconsin, Michigan

38:57

are a lot of these states have

39:00

Ohio right which is now Red red

39:02

and Sylvania which has some of the

39:04

convention. On. These states have

39:07

higher than the national average numbers

39:09

of white non college educated workers.

39:11

Now Das Trump's base stats where

39:13

he's at and a lot of

39:15

these folks are unionized now. Bombs

39:17

going off to call them Reagan

39:20

Democrats. Are. Because they

39:22

were all union democrats but they

39:24

were voting for Ronald Reagan. So

39:26

the shift the the undercurrents the

39:28

the foundational premise for for for

39:30

why blue collar. Voters. Are

39:32

moving towards shrubs. What? Has

39:34

been there for many decades before

39:36

shrubs. And I think a

39:38

lot of this comes down. The

39:40

best way to explain assists there

39:42

is a true genuine blue collar.

39:44

A Pulitzer in America? Yeah, that

39:46

is not understood. Or

39:48

releases to. By. White

39:51

collar workers. And. We

39:53

have had or with an explosion over

39:55

the last thirty years of people going

39:57

to college. Okay, and so

39:59

now. well, even though sixty percent of

40:01

the voters in America still do not

40:03

have a college degree. That. Gap

40:06

is closing. And

40:08

the divide is not even an economic

40:10

divide. There are plenty of people without

40:12

a college degree that are making a

40:14

hundred fifty, two hundred thousand a year.

40:16

We saw them on January six that

40:18

absolutely love Donald Trump. Is. Not

40:20

in economic divide. Say.

40:23

We we used to the old days. Yeah, twenty

40:25

years ago he would look and say oh. You're

40:27

each of your college degree. As.

40:30

Allows you to make more money. therefore

40:32

you're gonna become more republican. More.

40:34

Wealthy or people are increasingly

40:37

becoming democrats. As it

40:39

is correlates to that college degree. But

40:41

it's not. It's not. I'm sorry. It's

40:43

it's it's is commensurate. It's not. It's

40:45

not necessarily. of the cause

40:47

right to some causation. Surprising that

40:49

related. Is it's been so

40:51

obsession get confused good and I'm

40:53

getting will that model here my

40:56

explanation but what is happening with

40:58

the educational divide is Aziz college

41:00

degrees people have a nicely into

41:02

their own culture. Whatever.

41:04

Don't Perspectives on race and immigration

41:06

and gender and I am and

41:08

done culture. These soldiers are very

41:11

distinct and doing more distinctive blue

41:13

collar culture. And. So it's not

41:15

about into. Is. Increasingly about

41:17

region because we've been self sorting for the

41:19

same thirty years and a like red states

41:22

are getting redder and blue states are getting

41:24

blue. Or answer your question about u A

41:26

W is ultimately helps biden for sure. but

41:28

it doesn't help the way that it used

41:31

to. Hell. Are

41:34

you can also? I mean it helps him in a.

41:36

Narrative. Sense or can afford not to

41:38

have to spray would be a major all

41:41

me I need afl a major blow his

41:43

they didn't actually end up into his way.

41:45

Got on with the very reading.u: A W

41:47

Doors As I stated for. this

41:49

guy like that as i am story

41:52

right that sounds mad or blow dryer

41:54

and that's with that would have bad

41:56

or he has they sat on their

41:58

hands and relax That

42:01

would have hurt Biden terribly. But being

42:04

the union man and the union

42:06

narrative of being the working man

42:08

and working families, that narrative doesn't

42:10

work anymore. Because

42:12

union rates have dropped so much,

42:14

very few people have union jobs.

42:17

And the answer to that with globalization is not

42:19

let's unionize more because, sure, I

42:22

mean, I guess, but man, I'd love to live

42:24

in a world with unicorns and rainbows too. That's

42:26

not the way the economy works anymore. Unions

42:29

have to really dramatically update their

42:31

message because last century's solutions don't

42:33

work in this century. Let's

42:39

get back to listeners. Danella Kay wrote in just

42:42

after the Hamas terrorist talk on October 7th, and

42:44

she asked, does it feel

42:46

to you like it does to me that

42:49

we are getting perilously close to

42:51

another world war? With

42:54

the war in Ukraine, with the war

42:56

breaking out between Israel and Hamas, with

42:58

China itching to invade Taiwan, with North

43:00

Korea aiding Russia and Iran aiding Hamas,

43:03

it feels like it won't take much

43:06

for these separate battles to escalate into

43:08

a major global war. So

43:10

I want to build on Danella's

43:12

question here and invoke

43:15

one of my favorite thought leaders on

43:17

this topic, which is Ray Dalio, and

43:20

I mentioned him before, Bridgewater Associates, largest

43:22

hedge fund in the world. And

43:24

when I say largest, think Bridgewater.

43:28

Hedge funds, large hedge

43:30

funds tend to manage money for very

43:33

large institutions and billionaires and

43:36

corporations. Bridgewater

43:38

manages money for governments and

43:40

nation states. So it's a

43:43

macroeconomic hedge fund.

43:47

They manage money for countries. So they're looking

43:49

at the big picture and long-term cycles. So

43:51

Ray is now in his twilight years

43:55

and wants to give back this knowledge

43:57

that he's accumulated over the years and how he looks

43:59

at... the world

44:01

economy and he has extensively sort

44:03

of analyzed historical patterns and cycles, particularly

44:06

in the context of changing world orders,

44:08

which he's detailed in multiple

44:12

books and videos now. And

44:15

in his exploration of the various types and

44:17

phases of war that can occur as the

44:20

world order changes, he outlines

44:22

different kinds of wars and that they

44:24

sort of evolved into one another. You

44:27

have trade wars, right? When countries impose

44:29

tariffs or trade barriers against each other.

44:31

You have technology wars that involve a

44:33

struggle for technological supremacy. You

44:37

have geopolitical wars, which are often

44:39

where countries are vying for strategic

44:41

positioning, influence and power. You have

44:43

capital wars, which involves attempts

44:46

to influence and control global capital and

44:48

currency and financial markets. And

44:51

then you have cold wars, which represent

44:54

a state of sort of political military

44:56

tension where you avoid direct

44:58

conflict, but indirect methods such

45:00

as espionage, propaganda,

45:03

proxy conflict. And you have

45:05

hot wars, military conflicts, and these are the most

45:07

direct and violent forms of conflict,

45:10

armed confrontations, groups within nations.

45:13

So, Dalio emphasizes

45:15

that these types of wars and conflicts

45:18

don't occur in isolation. They're

45:21

interconnected. They evolve from one

45:23

form to another, but that

45:25

often these softer forms of war

45:27

precede hot military conflicts and the

45:29

victor of these conflicts emerges as

45:32

the one who gets to shape the new world order,

45:34

the leader of the global world order, which is currently

45:36

the United States threatened by China. So

45:38

if you think about this, Daniella, you've got US China.

45:42

We have a trade war started in

45:44

2018. We have a technology war, I

45:46

think Huawei, TikTok. We have geopolitical competition.

45:50

There's a geopolitical component in Taiwan. And

45:53

we have a cold war. You could argue competition

45:55

for global influence attempt to spread the yuan to

45:58

other countries to competing with the US dollar. and

46:00

sort of put a question mark after hot war.

46:03

We don't know yet, but Saina's, as you noted,

46:06

itching to invade. You've got US and

46:08

Russia, obviously, a hot and geopolitical war

46:10

in Ukraine, which we saw

46:12

up close, Mike. You have a

46:14

capital war. US has seized Russia's

46:16

foreign reserve assets, imposing brutal sanctions.

46:19

And now we have the Middle East. We have a

46:21

hot war between Israel and Hamas and Iran's proxies

46:23

in Yemen and elsewhere. And so I think

46:27

obviously, if Daniella is

46:29

right, it feels like the dominoes are

46:31

all lined up and it's only gonna

46:33

take one tipping at the right moment.

46:38

How do you think about this? Well,

46:40

I'm a big fan of Ray Dalio's too. He kind

46:43

of turned me on to his thinking

46:45

and his writing. And I think he's pretty

46:47

brilliant. I think

46:49

Daniella's asking the right question, but as

46:51

I've shared with you and listeners

46:53

here before, I believe we are

46:56

not only already at war, I

46:58

believe we've been in a war, global

47:01

war for the better part of

47:03

10 years, preceding the 2016 election. And

47:07

what I want people to really understand

47:09

is we have a conventional understanding of

47:11

what war looks like because so many

47:14

of us were raised with black and

47:16

white images of the

47:20

Battle of Britain or the

47:22

fight in France, fighting

47:24

against Nazi Germany. We think that that's

47:27

what a war is. That's what a,

47:29

and while that is true, war

47:32

and warfare, like everything else

47:34

in society, has changed dramatically.

47:37

And I think one of the reasons why

47:39

you and I were both compelled to go

47:41

to Ukraine was that was the moment while

47:44

it was a battle of authoritarianism versus

47:46

democracy, it was a battle versus East

47:48

versus West, it was the

47:51

flash point of all of these forces

47:53

and all these different types of warfare

47:55

meeting in one physical location on the

47:58

globe at that point. And

48:00

we were both keenly aware, and we discussed

48:02

this on a train ride from Lviv to

48:04

Kiev, going from near the Polish border to

48:06

the Donbass on the Eastern Front, having

48:10

this conversation about what we

48:12

were looking for, what this

48:14

moment meant in world history, because

48:16

this is truly going to be

48:18

a defining event for world history,

48:21

and the changing nature of combat and warfare

48:24

and what it's going to look like. And

48:28

for whatever reason, you and I wanted to kind

48:30

of see that experience, and Molly McHugh was kind

48:32

of our guide through that part of the world.

48:34

It was an extraordinary moment. And

48:37

I say that because we

48:42

are in World War III, and

48:45

I'm trying to say that without being alarmist, but

48:47

it's hard to look at the evidence and suggest

48:49

that that is not the case. When

48:52

so many foreign actors, nefarious actors,

48:54

are so involved in disrupting our

48:56

society aggressively, so involved

48:59

in managing and disrupting our

49:01

elections aggressively, if you do

49:03

not think that the attack

49:06

on October 7th in Israel

49:08

wasn't related to Iranian and

49:11

Russian involvement, you're missing

49:13

what is happening. The

49:16

axis of evil, as it were, is

49:18

Russia, Iran, and China. And

49:21

they all have a vested interest in

49:23

seeing the decline of the American Empire

49:26

and us being removed from

49:28

a position of global hegemony. The

49:31

last time we faced a

49:33

moment this critical, I would

49:35

suggest, was not even Pearl

49:37

Harbor and

49:40

the dark shadow descending upon

49:42

Europe with Nazism. It

49:45

was afterwards. It was the aftermath

49:47

in trying to establish the new

49:49

global order when, perhaps

49:52

coincidentally, we had a

49:54

president who nobody really wanted to

49:56

be president, who was just kind of parked there

49:58

as a place to be. Cheaper who

50:00

was not an elephant Speakers who

50:02

was an aging older fella from

50:05

yeah No a an unremarkable State

50:07

was an unremarkable legislative record in

50:09

the name of Harry Truman. And.

50:12

Harry Truman I think is is

50:14

he's our is was on one

50:16

of our coins for reasons like

50:18

was average human. That is because

50:20

he reestablished literally the entire global

50:22

order during his administration. And. Article

50:24

gonna be looking at have some a

50:26

lot more in the coming years because

50:29

as residual becomes a state that's for

50:31

later when the marshals are really started

50:33

to come insert not only origin but

50:35

starts take effect is where we start

50:37

to draw the first winds against the

50:39

global threat of communism at that time

50:41

and the more that the the battle

50:44

lines at that time. Were. Not

50:46

unlike they are now between

50:48

East West authoritarianism vs. dictatorship,

50:50

Democracy vs. You. Know of

50:53

fascism. But this time

50:55

the tools or difference. And. We

50:57

should. We could literally destroy each

51:00

other's economies in our societies without

51:02

ever. Of you're launching

51:04

artillery shells or nuclear bombs on

51:06

and you're seeing the division in

51:09

our society right now. It's

51:11

ordinary watching these republican governors basically

51:13

defying one of the sun suits

51:16

to the border in outright defiance

51:18

of the Federal government's. Das

51:20

guys, That's exactly what the Civil

51:23

War looks like. A big gap.

51:25

Lights on the histories rhyming. Really

51:28

really closely. Right now I get

51:30

and in Abbott and Taxes is

51:33

pushing. For. It for. For

51:35

an internal conflicts they're They're itching for

51:37

a war. That's exactly what the Russians

51:39

want us with exact with the Russians

51:42

have been financing. That's exactly what's that

51:44

we are that has a weakness is

51:46

the majority of the Republican party is

51:49

pushing for his source civil strife. Sas.

51:51

The best way to win this. Conflict.

51:54

Is not to go to size up

51:57

the states on three fronts, although that's

51:59

what's happening. right? At the

52:01

cardinals are blue trainers is hop on.

52:03

was from Europe. Israel.

52:05

Needs United States backing it up as

52:07

it's allies that are trying to spread

52:10

with a who sees another radium funded

52:12

organizations to draw our our navy and

52:14

our resources and are in our and

52:17

and a public opinion into the Middle

52:19

East as the conflict there is spreading

52:21

because that's by design the rainiest. Want

52:24

to open up front of the weights

52:26

your Italy did with Germany? And.

52:28

Then China is looking at. Reading all

52:30

of this and watching. This is all

52:33

part of a methodical plan. This is

52:35

that coincidence is Would were asking can

52:37

the United States. By. Our

52:40

Global A Global conflicts on three

52:42

fronts That has always been the

52:44

question and the most likely scenario.

52:47

From. For us losing. His.

52:49

The have a spread thin on

52:52

three different fronts which we are

52:54

currently prepared isaac to win at

52:56

enormous cost. What? The variable

52:58

is not. If we're engaged

53:01

in an internal civil on

53:03

let's. See. If we the ice

53:05

they start to go to war with one

53:07

another, we are perilously close. That's

53:09

the best remedy and solution.

53:12

For. Those three enemies to

53:14

take over the world.

53:17

That's. What door? That's what's happening

53:19

and that is by design so we

53:21

don't think that what is happening. But.

53:24

What is happening? this country's not

53:26

organic is being used and fomented

53:28

with millions and millions of dollars

53:30

paying for the Republican party to

53:32

turn on this country. I believe

53:34

that with all my heart I've

53:36

seen more than enough evidence experiences

53:38

of the Twenty when he campaigns,

53:40

and it's not hard to draw

53:42

the selection to to connect the

53:44

dots any more. That's why it's

53:46

so dangerous and that's what we're

53:48

facing of this moment in us.

53:50

And was history. Yes, Yes. Ah,

53:52

fully fully co sign. I think

53:54

that this, ah, Conversations.

53:56

That is incomplete unless we are

53:59

to delete. that this

54:01

is a war over values. And the

54:03

reason we are not prepared to win a

54:05

war on three fronts when

54:07

we're internally divided is because we will not be

54:09

united in the values we are fighting for. We

54:11

don't know what we are fighting for

54:14

collectively. And without that, without, this is

54:16

why as you've mentioned before, Lincoln was

54:18

obsessed with union. Without

54:20

a shared sense of what America is,

54:23

what its role is in the world, and what

54:25

our values are, it's very

54:27

difficult to win a battle for hearts and

54:30

minds outside of our own borders.

54:32

And that's ultimately what this is about. We've

54:34

talked about how China,

54:37

as part of their global, I'm

54:39

not sure what the initiative is called, but they

54:41

spell out that they want to

54:45

get rid of the idea of universal values. The

54:47

fact that universal values can exist in the first

54:49

place China is opposed to, they want a more

54:53

anarchical world

54:56

without any, they don't

54:58

want NATO because they don't believe in the

55:00

values NATO is there to defend, right?

55:03

This ultimately comes down to who

55:06

are human beings going to be, which direction is

55:08

humanity going? Yeah,

55:10

look, democracies are a threat to dictatorships.

55:14

Their existence is a threat because people start getting

55:17

these ideas, like maybe we don't need the dictator,

55:19

maybe we don't need Putin, maybe we don't need

55:21

Xi, maybe we don't need the Molos. And

55:24

democracy is a very revolutionary act and

55:26

it's still a very new act in

55:29

the course of human history. This

55:31

experiment is still very, very much experience. Well, I've

55:33

been a couple hundred years, right?

55:35

The model of fascism, the strong man, the

55:37

tribal chief, and has been with us since

55:39

we climbed out of the

55:41

primordial swamp. This idea that somehow

55:44

we could all share power essentially

55:46

amongst everybody and elevate people's role in

55:48

their own lives is an extraordinarily new

55:50

and novel concept. And most people don't

55:52

believe that it really has that much

55:54

of a runway. We as

55:57

Americans as living beings who've lived the vast majority

55:59

of the world. Live our lives, Will

56:01

is a time of global American

56:03

hegemony. At. A time when we

56:05

were the dominant power the world, and

56:08

at a time of relative peace. I've.

56:10

Really lost the plot here of

56:12

how fragile and how radically revolutionary

56:15

what we're doing. All this little

56:17

consonants is and how is probably

56:19

only happened because we were protected.

56:22

By. Friendly neighbors to the south and to

56:24

the north. and by these two oceans

56:26

the perfect future. This to allow this

56:28

the obsolete experiments to take place. Of

56:31

America couldn't have happened in the middle

56:33

of the European Council the could have

56:35

happened in Eurasia For a habit in

56:37

the Middle East will happen anywhere but

56:40

by this great fortune of of of

56:42

history of this accidents that it happened

56:44

in this time in in this place.

56:46

And. So is. it will always be under

56:49

threat because in many ways with a

56:51

group were just biologically constituted. Is

56:53

why we react to the fears

56:55

and the threats and the anger

56:57

and the outrage that we do

56:59

that fuels the sense that to

57:01

says once it becomes intractable. the

57:03

only solution is fascism. The law

57:05

school should is a strong man.

57:07

I alone can fix my problems

57:09

here. Was. Asked what is designed

57:12

to do. Is get that

57:14

that is the fight that we we

57:16

we face and my god yeah woo But

57:18

we've been saying as is this is a

57:20

global conflicts already. And you're

57:23

in it and in you. As a

57:25

listener, each individual person is already in.

57:27

and we start from four bucks orders

57:29

and the way the digital landscape has

57:31

remained. You're not helpless. You're on, I

57:33

know. Plus, you're both combatants and job

57:35

as a target at the same time.

57:37

You know? Ah, that's just the way

57:39

life is going to be going forward

57:41

is if you're not advocating for what

57:43

you believe, your succumbing to what others

57:45

would have done to you yet. As

57:47

As as does, just the way the

57:49

world. This isn't just as, not terribly

57:51

unlike most Europeans, lots of course of

57:53

human this is a as as a

57:56

french always thought it was told on

57:58

was worth a spanish coming

58:00

across the channel and, you know, what's

58:02

it doing? Like, that's game of thrones.

58:04

We have been insulated from that up

58:06

until the digital age. And we are

58:08

no longer insulated from that. This is

58:10

the way that most of humanity has

58:12

lived their lives in all of

58:14

recorded history. Yeah, no, now that

58:16

bad actors are buying or stealing and

58:19

exploiting our data and our attention

58:22

to change your mind, to change

58:24

what's going on in your brain and the more time

58:26

you spend in front of a screen, you should be

58:29

thinking that, as, God,

58:31

I hate to say it this way, but it's an attack sector. As

58:34

campaign professionals, we think about it as an attack

58:36

vector. It's a, that's what it is. That's

58:40

what's happening here. And if you think for a

58:42

moment that every second of your screen time isn't

58:45

being bought and paid for by somebody who

58:47

wants to change you, manipulate your behavior in

58:49

some way, you haven't figured

58:51

it out yet. It's a

58:53

much cheaper way to conduct war

58:56

than rolling tanks through the Donbass.

59:00

It's just, look, I'm

59:02

proud of the fact that we have eliminated

59:04

50% of Russia's military capacity

59:10

with 5% of our budget. Like

59:12

that's an extraordinary number in the kinetic war. But

59:15

we're not getting the rate of

59:17

return that Putin's getting by his

59:19

investment on TikTok ads and Facebook ads.

59:21

I mean, he's killing it. But

59:23

for the amount, for the many millions he's spent,

59:26

that's a fraction of what

59:28

you see. And their influence with Gen

59:31

Z in America. Yeah, precisely.

59:35

I mean, if you've told me Russia

59:38

could, you know, in 2014, when

59:40

he invaded Crimea, that if he spent $30

59:42

million and in 15

59:44

years he could have us going to war with

59:46

one another all day

59:49

long. Like I've spent $30 billion on

59:51

that. It's still cheap, right?

59:54

And that's what's happening. Is This

59:56

strife that we are seeing with one another is

59:58

because we are so plugged in. To

1:00:00

this business platforms are manipulating, are sauce

1:00:02

and isolating are are are are visions

1:00:05

and our world. You're making it impossible

1:00:07

to work with one another. We now

1:00:09

you. You. Know Ukraine in many

1:00:12

ways as as as a more

1:00:14

i'm. I'm sympathetic

1:00:16

figure and than texans.

1:00:18

Yeah, right, and vice versa. right?

1:00:20

Is Russians your more on the

1:00:23

side of the Russians? the may

1:00:25

of Californians like right? At that

1:00:27

point, you know that they have

1:00:29

some industry destabilized. The strongest bobble

1:00:31

heads demonic hold a good threat

1:00:33

as they see it. But.

1:00:36

Very cheaply by the way. I

1:00:39

want to talk about Christmas on them but let's let's

1:00:41

see lots of the next one will soon as a nice

1:00:43

when because we just crossed the hour mark So I

1:00:45

want to sort wrap this up. Because

1:00:47

that's going to be a whole thing.

1:00:49

Snopes Ah why don't you know? Unless

1:00:52

you're some reviews I think here because

1:00:54

got some good ones. We appreciate your

1:00:56

reviews and want you to know we

1:00:58

appreciate review some in. read some of

1:01:00

them on Apple podcasts. Are. One

1:01:02

reviewer roads. Are seriously

1:01:04

hope to meet you one day.

1:01:06

Love this show and other reviewer

1:01:08

Road Fantastic combination of thoughtful and

1:01:10

insightful discussion of political and social

1:01:12

issues and how they ship American

1:01:15

international relationships. Ah thank

1:01:17

you. Here's one more. This. Is

1:01:19

an excellent Podcast Is important to listen to

1:01:21

and understand different points of view. Even.

1:01:24

When I don't agree with something and never

1:01:26

feel that the people on the podcast are

1:01:28

speaking in bad seeds or that their beliefs

1:01:30

aren't based on evidence, I can't tell you

1:01:33

how much I appreciate that kind of review

1:01:35

because. As a high praise

1:01:37

I read that as high praise because.

1:01:40

We do have a lot of

1:01:42

differing opinions and views. Come.

1:01:45

Through Ah, the So and I

1:01:47

think it's essential. It's essential

1:01:49

to understand how other people are viewing.

1:01:52

Problems. And I think it's even. I

1:01:54

think it's extremely important to expose yourself to.

1:01:56

I'm wells formed arguments that

1:01:58

you disagree with. Ah,

1:02:00

so that you can. I'm. Maybe.

1:02:04

It's persuasive to you. or maybe it's weapons

1:02:06

your own use, your own ability to defend

1:02:08

your views, and so I think that's. Am

1:02:10

I take that? I think that's a heart

1:02:13

and I appreciate that one a lot. So

1:02:15

ah, these reviews obviously in the ratings and

1:02:17

up I guess really do help us rise

1:02:19

in the ranking. So. That. New people

1:02:22

can discover what ecology organically to be. have

1:02:24

a minute. Would really appreciate it if you.

1:02:27

I could go to the So An Apple podcasts

1:02:29

and leave us a rating and review their. I'm

1:02:32

I'm wondering what others at or below or

1:02:34

ear to ear this is about building a

1:02:36

community of there's a stinking people and that

1:02:38

this is that the cheerleading section right if

1:02:40

you want that you can get out that

1:02:42

of the things are a lot of honor

1:02:45

all over the place on the interacts with

1:02:47

a little was awful discussions with people who

1:02:49

don't always agree but the the I've ever

1:02:51

heard the other day that you're the best

1:02:53

way to said said know whether you've you've

1:02:55

been thoughts about subpoenas, suits to clearly articulate

1:02:57

your opponent's fashion, criticism of your arguments and

1:03:00

to be able to understand it. The Gts

1:03:02

do that if you don't really have it

1:03:04

wilson saw or opinion on your own. Point.

1:03:06

Of view it as as it really describes

1:03:08

his show. It's if there's a lot of

1:03:10

us who don't agree on these things, but

1:03:13

we're doing it in a way that is

1:03:15

thoughtful. We we disagree a lot. We realized.

1:03:17

We use the point that out just because

1:03:19

we're trying to comes a deeper understanding. There's

1:03:21

nobody here. I'm saying I am right about

1:03:23

all of this. It's I want to learn

1:03:25

more. And our best I love about

1:03:28

about but the show. Totally. Ah

1:03:30

is one more I'm. That.

1:03:32

I wanted to know here. where

1:03:35

is it? Oh yes from

1:03:37

Sharon who wrote in and said.

1:03:40

I'm a fan of your podcast. Do great job! Thank you

1:03:42

thank you for all your hard work. Would. You

1:03:44

ever consider traveling and doing a live show

1:03:46

and townhall? as you like it

1:03:48

would be hugely successful were one you're out

1:03:50

of people need to get serious and informed

1:03:52

i share the podcast with people but some

1:03:54

who don't regularly listen to podcasts may not

1:03:56

listen i think a town hall where you

1:03:59

could both Video and record

1:04:01

for the podcast would be very interesting. You

1:04:03

have some regular guests who would be key,

1:04:05

such as Mike Madrid. It's hard

1:04:07

to ever disagree with what he says. He

1:04:11

makes me want to go to grad school and learn more

1:04:14

political theory. Well, should

1:04:16

you ever consider this? I hope I will be

1:04:18

the first to know so I can get front

1:04:20

row tickets. Thank you, Sharon. Yes,

1:04:23

very, very kind. Yes,

1:04:26

we're absolutely considering it. We'd like to do

1:04:28

it definitely this campaign

1:04:30

season. So stay tuned

1:04:32

and sign up for Politicology Plus because you'll

1:04:34

probably hear about it there first. So

1:04:36

all right, folks, that's

1:04:38

it for today. And

1:04:41

if you want to write to us about

1:04:43

anything we've talked about, you want to drop

1:04:45

a question in the mailbag, you can reach

1:04:48

us at podcast at politicology.com. And now you

1:04:50

can even leave us a voicemail by

1:04:52

calling 202-455-4558. And

1:04:57

we might even play it on the next

1:04:59

show. I'm Ron Steslow. See you in the

1:05:01

next episode.