WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.220 Welcome, welcome to the deep dive. Settle in, 00:00:03.419 --> 00:00:06.599 folks, because we're about to jump headfirst 00:00:06.599 --> 00:00:09.400 into a stack of recent sources. Really interesting 00:00:09.400 --> 00:00:12.199 stuff today. We're looking at some, well, pretty 00:00:12.199 --> 00:00:14.880 dynamic and intense areas of public life. Think 00:00:14.880 --> 00:00:18.109 political fights. big legal cases, and, of course, 00:00:18.250 --> 00:00:20.190 the elections shaping things. That's right. And 00:00:20.190 --> 00:00:22.910 our mission, really, is to pull out those crucial 00:00:22.910 --> 00:00:24.670 nuggets of knowledge for you. We're going to 00:00:24.670 --> 00:00:27.870 give you the context, connect the dots, and highlight 00:00:27.870 --> 00:00:30.030 some surprising facts that help you stay informed 00:00:30.030 --> 00:00:32.590 without getting totally overwhelmed. You'll see 00:00:32.590 --> 00:00:35.310 how things that seem separate, like news about 00:00:35.310 --> 00:00:38.369 maps and jobs numbers and court cases, actually 00:00:38.369 --> 00:00:41.729 weave together. big themes, power, how laws get 00:00:41.729 --> 00:00:43.929 interpreted, the changing election landscape. 00:00:44.149 --> 00:00:46.530 So let's dive in. OK, let's kick things off where 00:00:46.530 --> 00:00:49.369 things are really hot right now, Texas, the whole 00:00:49.369 --> 00:00:51.490 redistricting battle there. Our sources say the 00:00:51.490 --> 00:00:53.369 political temperature is just boiling over. You're 00:00:53.369 --> 00:00:55.490 hearing about actual screaming and fist shaking. 00:00:55.710 --> 00:00:58.770 It's intense. Yeah. And what's fascinating or 00:00:58.770 --> 00:01:02.869 maybe. Predictable is how much of it plays out 00:01:02.869 --> 00:01:05.769 as pure political performance. You've got Texas 00:01:05.769 --> 00:01:08.510 AG Ken Paxton, who, let's be honest, is clearly 00:01:08.510 --> 00:01:10.769 gunning for a promotion, maybe US Senator, in 00:01:10.769 --> 00:01:13.409 this public fight with Beto O 'Rourke. Right. 00:01:13.609 --> 00:01:16.150 O 'Rourke was fundraising initially for those 00:01:16.150 --> 00:01:18.689 quorum jumpers, the legislators who left the 00:01:18.689 --> 00:01:21.269 state. Yeah, exactly. But then a court issued 00:01:21.269 --> 00:01:23.090 a restraining order, so we had to shift gears. 00:01:23.590 --> 00:01:26.310 Now it's about fighting gerrymandering more generally. 00:01:26.629 --> 00:01:29.700 And Paxton is, well, Our sources say he's not 00:01:29.700 --> 00:01:31.959 happy. He's actually claiming O 'Rourke violated 00:01:31.959 --> 00:01:34.680 that order with just a couple sentences worth 00:01:34.680 --> 00:01:37.200 of speech. Yeah, just a few words at a rally. 00:01:37.859 --> 00:01:39.459 And Paxton's pushing for O 'Rourke's arrest. 00:01:40.019 --> 00:01:42.879 Actual jail time. It sounds extreme. But the 00:01:42.879 --> 00:01:45.180 analysis we saw suggests something else might 00:01:45.180 --> 00:01:47.840 be going on. It suggests O 'Rourke might actually 00:01:47.840 --> 00:01:50.319 love, love, love, love to be arrested, seriously. 00:01:50.519 --> 00:01:52.500 Right, after losing a couple of big races, the 00:01:52.500 --> 00:01:54.420 idea is maybe this makes him a kind of martyr, 00:01:54.659 --> 00:01:56.900 gets him back into the game. Makes him the face 00:01:56.900 --> 00:01:59.299 of the anti -Paxton resistance. It really does 00:01:59.299 --> 00:02:01.819 feel like political theater, you know, from both 00:02:01.819 --> 00:02:04.180 sides. It certainly looks that way. I mean, Paxton 00:02:04.180 --> 00:02:06.939 gets to show he's owning the libs, and O 'Rourke... 00:02:06.969 --> 00:02:09.889 potentially gets a boost. But you have to ask, 00:02:10.090 --> 00:02:13.189 beyond the show, are there real strategic calculations 00:02:13.189 --> 00:02:15.550 here? What's the actual end game? And Governor 00:02:15.550 --> 00:02:17.050 Greg Abbott's right in the middle of it, too. 00:02:17.069 --> 00:02:19.990 He was on CNN saying he could have turned 10 00:02:19.990 --> 00:02:22.389 Democratic seats Republican, but he only did 00:02:22.389 --> 00:02:24.969 five because he's such a kindhearted soul who 00:02:24.969 --> 00:02:27.370 loves democracy. You can almost hear the sarcasm 00:02:27.370 --> 00:02:30.870 in the source material. Mm hmm. And he promised 00:02:30.870 --> 00:02:33.639 on ex Twitter. you know, the platform formerly 00:02:33.639 --> 00:02:36.560 known as Twitter, to call special session after 00:02:36.560 --> 00:02:39.180 special session to get around Texas law limits. 00:02:39.560 --> 00:02:42.000 And he joined Paxson in calling for O 'Rourke's 00:02:42.000 --> 00:02:43.939 arrest, too. The whole thing's quite something. 00:02:44.099 --> 00:02:47.280 It really is. And speaking of performative politics 00:02:47.280 --> 00:02:49.780 playing out online, California's Governor Newsom 00:02:49.780 --> 00:02:52.340 got in on it, too. He posted this really weird 00:02:52.340 --> 00:02:54.780 message on ex -Twitter kind of mimicking Trump's 00:02:54.780 --> 00:02:57.340 style. Oh, yeah, I saw that. It was like, final 00:02:57.340 --> 00:02:59.860 warning, Donald Trump. maybe the most important 00:02:59.860 --> 00:03:02.620 warning in history, stop cheating or California 00:03:02.620 --> 00:03:05.360 will redraw the maps and so on. Lots of caps, 00:03:05.780 --> 00:03:07.780 called himself the most loved and handsome governor. 00:03:08.520 --> 00:03:10.879 Our source called it a little ham -fisted, maybe 00:03:10.879 --> 00:03:13.599 not the worst Trump parody, but still. So what 00:03:13.599 --> 00:03:16.280 is all this, the Texas drama, the Newsom post, 00:03:16.759 --> 00:03:19.219 what does this kind of performative politics 00:03:19.219 --> 00:03:22.300 tell us, beyond just the maps themselves? What's 00:03:22.300 --> 00:03:24.099 it say about the state of our electoral battles 00:03:24.099 --> 00:03:26.340 right now? That's a great question. It feels 00:03:26.340 --> 00:03:28.900 like it's more about riling up the base and scoring 00:03:28.900 --> 00:03:32.280 points than maybe policy substance sometimes. 00:03:32.460 --> 00:03:34.680 I think that's a big part of it. It's about crafting 00:03:34.680 --> 00:03:36.860 narratives, mobilizing support, maybe demonizing 00:03:36.860 --> 00:03:39.719 the other side. Spectacle often wins over substance 00:03:39.719 --> 00:03:41.560 these days, it seems. Okay, let's shift gears 00:03:41.560 --> 00:03:45.169 a bit. from political maps to, well, the integrity 00:03:45.169 --> 00:03:47.310 of government numbers. Because our sources have 00:03:47.310 --> 00:03:49.370 a really critical assessment of Donald Trump's 00:03:49.370 --> 00:03:51.449 pick for the new head of the Bureau of Labor 00:03:51.449 --> 00:03:53.990 Statistics, E .J. Antony. One headline just lays 00:03:53.990 --> 00:03:57.349 it out. Confirmed, E .J. Antony is the Baghdad 00:03:57.349 --> 00:04:00.490 Bob of labor statistics. That's quite a statement. 00:04:01.090 --> 00:04:03.610 It is. It's a direct comparison, you know, to 00:04:03.610 --> 00:04:06.889 the Iraqi official famous for completely inaccurate 00:04:06.889 --> 00:04:09.650 statements during the war. It signals deep concern 00:04:09.650 --> 00:04:11.650 about whether you can trust the numbers if Antoni 00:04:11.650 --> 00:04:14.430 is in charge. And his public record seems to 00:04:14.430 --> 00:04:17.769 fuel that concern. His ex Twitter feed, described 00:04:17.769 --> 00:04:20.689 as chock full of political propaganda masquerading 00:04:20.689 --> 00:04:24.129 as serious economic analysis. And his CV apparently 00:04:24.129 --> 00:04:26.490 includes papers that are just well. Partisan 00:04:26.490 --> 00:04:29.410 nonsense. Like, there's one paper he co -wrote 00:04:29.410 --> 00:04:31.550 last year claiming the US has been in a recession 00:04:31.550 --> 00:04:34.790 since 2022. That claim got absolutely shredded 00:04:34.790 --> 00:04:36.970 by economists. And not just from one side, right? 00:04:37.110 --> 00:04:39.009 The critiques came from the right as well. Exactly. 00:04:39.110 --> 00:04:40.790 That's what's striking. You have Dave Hibbert 00:04:40.790 --> 00:04:43.050 from the American Institute for Economic Research 00:04:43.050 --> 00:04:45.689 pointing out Antoni's inability to understand 00:04:45.689 --> 00:04:48.649 basic economics and how fast he's gone Mejia. 00:04:49.810 --> 00:04:52.439 Stan Vigor. Over at the American Enterprise Institute 00:04:52.439 --> 00:04:55.360 said Antoni's work has elementary errors and 00:04:55.360 --> 00:04:58.019 nonsensical choices that always bias his findings 00:04:58.019 --> 00:05:00.560 in one partisan direction. And Jessica Riedel 00:05:00.560 --> 00:05:02.879 at the Manhattan Institute called him the most 00:05:02.879 --> 00:05:05.519 error filled of any think tank economist right 00:05:05.519 --> 00:05:08.399 now. Said he's not seen in many D .C. policy 00:05:08.399 --> 00:05:11.379 circles. That's pretty damning. It really is. 00:05:11.439 --> 00:05:14.019 And then Paul Krugman wrote a, quote, scorching 00:05:14.019 --> 00:05:16.540 takedown of Stephen Moore, who actually recommended 00:05:16.540 --> 00:05:19.079 Antoni for the job while also claiming the job 00:05:19.079 --> 00:05:21.769 numbers are great. the irony there. So a lot 00:05:21.769 --> 00:05:24.250 of red flags. A lot and maybe the most worrying 00:05:24.250 --> 00:05:27.009 thing mentioned is Antoni's proposal, get this, 00:05:27.930 --> 00:05:30.850 to potentially not issue the jobs data at all 00:05:30.850 --> 00:05:33.569 for several months so they can be quote corrected. 00:05:34.160 --> 00:05:36.300 Seemingly because he anticipates bad numbers. 00:05:36.360 --> 00:05:39.180 That's alarming. So what happens now this position 00:05:39.180 --> 00:05:41.360 commissioner labor statistics It needs Senate 00:05:41.360 --> 00:05:43.819 approval, right? 50 votes at least 50 senators. 00:05:43.819 --> 00:05:46.680 Yes So given all this criticism, especially from 00:05:46.680 --> 00:05:49.319 conservative leaning think tanks, is it possible 00:05:49.319 --> 00:05:51.939 this confirmation is just a bridge too far? Could 00:05:51.939 --> 00:05:54.709 the nomination get pulled? It's certainly possible. 00:05:54.889 --> 00:05:57.389 I mean, the core insight here is just how crucial 00:05:57.389 --> 00:06:00.430 impartial government data is. If those figures 00:06:00.430 --> 00:06:03.069 become untrustworthy, it damages everything. 00:06:03.449 --> 00:06:05.790 Public trust, policy decisions, financial markets, 00:06:06.290 --> 00:06:08.250 everything relies on that data being credible. 00:06:09.110 --> 00:06:11.009 So, yeah, the Senate confirmation process here 00:06:11.009 --> 00:06:13.949 is incredibly important. Politicizing data is 00:06:13.949 --> 00:06:16.470 dangerous territory. OK, so from maps and numbers, 00:06:16.589 --> 00:06:18.670 let's pivot to the courts. because there are 00:06:18.670 --> 00:06:20.930 some equally intense battles happening there 00:06:20.930 --> 00:06:23.829 over fundamental rights. Our sources talk about 00:06:23.829 --> 00:06:27.230 the, quote, dire state of the Voting Rights Act, 00:06:27.310 --> 00:06:30.350 the VRA. Apparently, the Supreme Court is busy 00:06:30.350 --> 00:06:33.029 year round now using the shadow docket those 00:06:33.029 --> 00:06:36.209 decisions made quickly without full arguments. 00:06:36.470 --> 00:06:38.050 Right. Emergency appeals and things like that. 00:06:38.050 --> 00:06:40.430 And they're using it and also reopening cases 00:06:40.430 --> 00:06:43.290 to, quote, decimate what had been well settled 00:06:43.290 --> 00:06:45.990 areas of the law. And a key case to watch here 00:06:45.990 --> 00:06:49.459 is Louisiana v. Calais. The court has actually 00:06:49.459 --> 00:06:52.459 asked the parties to re -argue a major challenge 00:06:52.459 --> 00:06:55.779 involving Section 2 of the VRA. Section 2 is 00:06:55.779 --> 00:06:58.300 crucial. It prohibits voting practices that discriminate 00:06:58.300 --> 00:07:01.220 based on race. Politico even asked, you know, 00:07:01.379 --> 00:07:04.180 will the VRA even make it to its 61st anniversary? 00:07:04.319 --> 00:07:06.939 It's turning 60 soon. Wow. And this isn't happening 00:07:06.939 --> 00:07:09.399 in a vacuum, right? The VRA has already been 00:07:09.399 --> 00:07:12.060 weakened significantly. Absolutely. You have 00:07:12.060 --> 00:07:14.439 to remember, back in 2013, the Roberts court 00:07:14.439 --> 00:07:18.000 struck down Section 5 in Shelby v. Holder. Section 00:07:18.000 --> 00:07:20.079 5 was the part that required states with a history 00:07:20.079 --> 00:07:22.620 of discrimination to get federal approval pre 00:07:22.620 --> 00:07:25.439 -clearance before changing voting laws. That's 00:07:25.439 --> 00:07:27.839 when Justice Ginsburg wrote that famous dissent. 00:07:28.240 --> 00:07:30.100 It's like throwing away your umbrella in a rainstorm 00:07:30.100 --> 00:07:32.319 because you're not getting wet. Pointing at the 00:07:32.319 --> 00:07:34.360 irony that the law's success was being used to 00:07:34.360 --> 00:07:37.120 justify gutting it. Exactly. And it's worth remembering, 00:07:37.360 --> 00:07:39.920 Section 5 wasn't some radical thing. It was reauthorized 00:07:39.920 --> 00:07:43.730 in 2006. Senate vote was 98 to 0. Signed by George 00:07:43.730 --> 00:07:46.629 W. Bush. 98 to 0. And then after the Shelby ruling 00:07:46.629 --> 00:07:48.610 took away that pre -clearance, what happened? 00:07:49.089 --> 00:07:51.250 Predictably, many of those previously covered 00:07:51.250 --> 00:07:53.850 states started passing laws that made it harder 00:07:53.850 --> 00:07:57.149 for minorities to vote. Voter ID laws, cutting 00:07:57.149 --> 00:08:00.129 polling places, reducing early voting days, even 00:08:00.129 --> 00:08:02.310 laws making it illegal to give water to people 00:08:02.310 --> 00:08:04.930 waiting in long lines, often in minority neighborhoods. 00:08:05.189 --> 00:08:07.430 OK, so back to Louisiana v. Calais. What are 00:08:07.430 --> 00:08:09.750 the specifics there? So Louisiana drew a map 00:08:09.750 --> 00:08:12.449 in twenty twenty two with only one majority black 00:08:12.449 --> 00:08:15.750 district. It got sued under Section two for diluting 00:08:15.750 --> 00:08:18.329 minority votes. A district court agreed it was 00:08:18.329 --> 00:08:21.250 unlawful. OK, so then Louisiana redraws the map 00:08:21.250 --> 00:08:24.389 for 2024, this time with two majority minority 00:08:24.389 --> 00:08:26.750 districts. Trying to comply with Section 2, presumably. 00:08:26.769 --> 00:08:29.810 Right. But then a group of white voters sued, 00:08:30.290 --> 00:08:32.809 saying that map violated the 14th Amendment's 00:08:32.809 --> 00:08:34.850 Equal Protection Clause because it was drawn 00:08:34.850 --> 00:08:37.990 based on race. And remarkably, a three -judge 00:08:37.990 --> 00:08:40.889 federal court agreed and invalidated the 2024 00:08:40.889 --> 00:08:43.610 map, too. So they're caught between Section 2 00:08:43.610 --> 00:08:45.899 of the VRA and the 14th Amendment. That's what 00:08:45.899 --> 00:08:48.360 Louisiana argued on appeal to the Supreme Court 00:08:48.360 --> 00:08:51.379 that they could satisfy both. Race based action 00:08:51.379 --> 00:08:53.340 is allowed sometimes if there's a compelling 00:08:53.340 --> 00:08:55.799 reason, like remedying past discrimination under 00:08:55.799 --> 00:08:58.379 the VRA. But then SCOTUS, through a curveball, 00:08:58.539 --> 00:09:00.480 they asked a completely new question. Which was? 00:09:01.000 --> 00:09:03.240 Does the intentional creation of that second 00:09:03.240 --> 00:09:05.639 majority black district, even if it's to comply 00:09:05.639 --> 00:09:08.379 with the VRA, violate the 14th or 15th amendments? 00:09:08.740 --> 00:09:12.309 And here's the really profound implication. If 00:09:12.309 --> 00:09:16.029 the court says yes, it could mean Section 2 of 00:09:16.029 --> 00:09:19.440 the VRA itself is unconstitutional. Wow, that 00:09:19.440 --> 00:09:22.019 would basically gut the main remaining enforcement 00:09:22.019 --> 00:09:24.379 part of the Voting Rights Act. Precisely. And 00:09:24.379 --> 00:09:27.019 it seems to fit into what some see as Chief Justice 00:09:27.019 --> 00:09:30.139 Roberts' long -term goal or quest, as one source 00:09:30.139 --> 00:09:32.480 put it. His view seems to be that any government 00:09:32.480 --> 00:09:35.080 action based on race, even remedial action meant 00:09:35.080 --> 00:09:38.019 to fix discrimination, violates the Constitution's 00:09:38.019 --> 00:09:40.379 promise of race neutrality. But race neutrality 00:09:40.379 --> 00:09:42.419 in a society that still deals with the effects 00:09:42.419 --> 00:09:45.259 of racial discrimination, that sounds problematic. 00:09:45.610 --> 00:09:47.590 It could implicate tons of other civil rights 00:09:47.590 --> 00:09:50.789 laws, too, not just voting. Rick Hansen, the 00:09:50.789 --> 00:09:53.330 election law expert, put it this way. A kind 00:09:53.330 --> 00:09:56.070 of race neutral reading of the Constitution would 00:09:56.070 --> 00:09:59.250 potentially read out Congress's power to enact 00:09:59.250 --> 00:10:02.629 race conscious remedies to protect minority voters. 00:10:03.350 --> 00:10:05.889 So states could draw maps that clearly disadvantage 00:10:05.889 --> 00:10:08.909 minority voters claim it's just partisan gerrymandering, 00:10:09.029 --> 00:10:11.429 not racial. And the Roberts court might just 00:10:11.429 --> 00:10:14.940 say, OK, too bad. That seems to be the loophole. 00:10:15.019 --> 00:10:17.820 If it's partisan, even if the effect is discriminatory, 00:10:18.179 --> 00:10:20.080 you might be out of luck in federal court. And 00:10:20.080 --> 00:10:21.580 there's another threat, too, right? Something 00:10:21.580 --> 00:10:24.059 about private lawsuits. Yeah, the Eighth Circuit 00:10:24.059 --> 00:10:26.200 Court of Appeals ruled that Section 2 doesn't 00:10:26.200 --> 00:10:28.960 allow individuals or groups a private right of 00:10:28.960 --> 00:10:31.860 action to sue. Only the federal government, the 00:10:31.860 --> 00:10:34.659 DOJ, can enforce it. Now, SCOTUS put that ruling 00:10:34.659 --> 00:10:37.100 on hold for now. But if they eventually agree 00:10:37.100 --> 00:10:39.159 with the Eighth Circuit... Then Section 2 becomes 00:10:39.159 --> 00:10:41.720 basically useless if the administration in power 00:10:41.720 --> 00:10:44.139 doesn't want to enforce it. Like, say, a Trump 00:10:44.139 --> 00:10:46.919 administration's DOJ might have absolutely no 00:10:46.919 --> 00:10:49.200 interest in bringing those cases. Exactly. It 00:10:49.200 --> 00:10:52.039 would render Section 2 a dead letter in praxis. 00:10:52.340 --> 00:10:55.399 So the takeaway here is... This isn't just about 00:10:55.399 --> 00:10:58.720 one map in Louisiana. It's a fundamental challenge 00:10:58.720 --> 00:11:02.139 to using race -conscious policies to fix discrimination 00:11:02.139 --> 00:11:05.100 in voting. And the ripple effects could be huge 00:11:05.100 --> 00:11:07.139 across civil rights law. That's the critical 00:11:07.139 --> 00:11:09.360 insight. Yes, it's a potential reinterpretation 00:11:09.360 --> 00:11:12.000 of equality itself, moving away from remedying 00:11:12.000 --> 00:11:14.679 historical wrongs towards a neutrality that might 00:11:14.679 --> 00:11:18.480 ignore ongoing disparities. Really big stuff. 00:11:18.620 --> 00:11:21.159 Okay. Uh, shifting again slightly within the 00:11:21.159 --> 00:11:23.240 legal world, let's talk about a specific court 00:11:23.240 --> 00:11:26.500 win for UCLA. It touches on government contracts 00:11:26.500 --> 00:11:28.480 and grants. Now, generally, the government has 00:11:28.480 --> 00:11:30.240 a lot of power to cancel these things, right? 00:11:30.360 --> 00:11:32.820 More power than, say, a private company. They 00:11:32.820 --> 00:11:34.740 can cancel for default if you don't need the 00:11:34.740 --> 00:11:37.700 terms or just for convenience, like budget cuts 00:11:37.700 --> 00:11:40.039 or the work isn't needed anymore. But there are 00:11:40.039 --> 00:11:42.440 limits. There are. The government can't act in 00:11:42.440 --> 00:11:45.480 bad faith. They need a clear justification. They 00:11:45.480 --> 00:11:49.659 have to follow a process paperwork time. and 00:11:49.659 --> 00:11:53.080 usually they have to pay termination costs. Now, 00:11:53.200 --> 00:11:55.100 our sources describe the current administration 00:11:55.100 --> 00:11:58.759 as, quote, heavy on arbitrariness and short on 00:11:58.759 --> 00:12:01.120 following the rules. Which, ironically, might 00:12:01.120 --> 00:12:03.639 actually help universities fight back. Exactly. 00:12:03.759 --> 00:12:06.179 It gives them plenty of room to go to court. 00:12:06.669 --> 00:12:09.649 And UCLA did just that. And pretty quickly, too, 00:12:10.070 --> 00:12:12.149 a judge ruled for the university, ordering the 00:12:12.149 --> 00:12:14.730 White House to, quote, uncancel at least 300 00:12:14.730 --> 00:12:17.250 of the 800 grants it had frozen. This happened, 00:12:17.250 --> 00:12:19.450 like, hours after it was being discussed. So 00:12:19.450 --> 00:12:21.490 that's significant. It shows there's some basis 00:12:21.490 --> 00:12:23.529 for fighting back in court. Maybe even get a 00:12:23.529 --> 00:12:25.860 quick rolling. Right. And it's worth noting the 00:12:25.860 --> 00:12:28.059 UC regions apparently had an emergency meeting 00:12:28.059 --> 00:12:30.139 and weren't willing to accept what one source 00:12:30.139 --> 00:12:33.000 called a $1 billion bribe related to this. So 00:12:33.000 --> 00:12:35.379 UCLA might be the school that really decides 00:12:35.379 --> 00:12:37.879 to hold the line here, not just give in. It looks 00:12:37.879 --> 00:12:41.059 that way. As for why UCLA was targeted, well, 00:12:41.179 --> 00:12:43.200 the first guess was maybe something about football 00:12:43.200 --> 00:12:46.120 season starting. Seems flimsy. But a newer theory 00:12:46.120 --> 00:12:48.679 seems more plausible. Apparently a student gave 00:12:48.679 --> 00:12:51.779 a graduation speech back in June saying some 00:12:51.779 --> 00:12:54.759 harsh and quite crude things about the administration. 00:12:55.659 --> 00:12:58.240 And that speech video has been circulating recently 00:12:58.240 --> 00:13:01.220 among, you know, Magy ad types on social media. 00:13:02.279 --> 00:13:05.080 Ah, and the suggestion is? The suggestion is 00:13:05.080 --> 00:13:08.539 if a certain figure who spent a lot of time on 00:13:08.539 --> 00:13:11.980 Magy social media saw that video, it's exactly 00:13:11.980 --> 00:13:13.759 the kind of thing that would make him blow his 00:13:13.759 --> 00:13:16.539 top and maybe retaliate. So the core insight 00:13:16.539 --> 00:13:19.340 from UCLA's win isn't just about grants. It's 00:13:19.340 --> 00:13:21.399 about the legal system potentially acting as 00:13:21.399 --> 00:13:24.360 a check on, well, arbitrary executive power, 00:13:24.639 --> 00:13:26.779 especially when it seems politically motivated. 00:13:26.940 --> 00:13:29.200 It offers some defense for academic freedom and 00:13:29.200 --> 00:13:31.820 free speech, even in this supercharged environment. 00:13:32.360 --> 00:13:34.259 Precisely. OK, shall we move to the electoral 00:13:34.259 --> 00:13:36.200 battlefield? Some interesting U .S. Senate races 00:13:36.200 --> 00:13:38.120 shaping up. Let's do it. Where do we start? How 00:13:38.120 --> 00:13:41.419 about Ohio? Sherrod Brown, the Democrat, is trying 00:13:41.419 --> 00:13:44.179 to win back the see he lost last year to Senator 00:13:44.179 --> 00:13:46.620 Bernie Moreno. He'll be up against the appointed 00:13:46.620 --> 00:13:49.659 Senator John Husted, who apparently has a very 00:13:49.659 --> 00:13:53.080 mixed record and didn't really want the job. 00:13:53.539 --> 00:13:55.700 Brown's seen as the dim with the best chance 00:13:55.700 --> 00:13:57.940 there. Okay. And Senate Leader Schumer's busy 00:13:57.940 --> 00:14:01.200 recruiting elsewhere, too, right? Maine. Yeah. 00:14:01.200 --> 00:14:03.799 In Maine, the push is on Governor Janet Mills 00:14:03.799 --> 00:14:07.139 to challenge Senator Susan Collins, who's described 00:14:07.139 --> 00:14:10.340 as increasingly unpopular. Even if Mills says 00:14:10.340 --> 00:14:12.919 no, the analysis suggests Democrats have other 00:14:12.919 --> 00:14:15.809 viable options. in Montana. Schumer is also trying 00:14:15.809 --> 00:14:17.730 hard to get John Tester back in the game there. 00:14:17.950 --> 00:14:19.769 Tester is considered an even bigger get because 00:14:19.769 --> 00:14:21.610 frankly, Democrats don't seem to have any other 00:14:21.610 --> 00:14:23.470 strong options in Montana besides the former 00:14:23.470 --> 00:14:26.090 senator. Got it. What about Alabama? Interesting 00:14:26.090 --> 00:14:28.230 race there. Senator Tuberville is running for 00:14:28.230 --> 00:14:30.730 governor, so his Senate seat is open. Representative 00:14:30.730 --> 00:14:33.330 Barry Moore is running for it. His stated reason, 00:14:33.570 --> 00:14:37.649 people deserve a Trump conservative. So the analysis 00:14:37.649 --> 00:14:39.850 basically says the only issue in that race will 00:14:39.850 --> 00:14:42.250 be who can be the Trumpiest of all. Sounds about 00:14:42.250 --> 00:14:44.809 right for Alabama these days. Quick correction 00:14:44.809 --> 00:14:47.610 from our notes, by the way. Sandy Stimson, mentioned 00:14:47.610 --> 00:14:49.889 as a potential candidate, is apparently not a 00:14:49.889 --> 00:14:53.309 woman. Another middle -aged white man. Ah, OK. 00:14:53.490 --> 00:14:56.309 Good catch. Then there's Georgia. Senator John 00:14:56.309 --> 00:14:58.870 Ossoff is the target there. And former Tennessee 00:14:58.870 --> 00:15:01.889 football coach Derek Dooley is jumping in. Dooley? 00:15:02.269 --> 00:15:05.389 He has a history of saying some pretty bizarre 00:15:05.389 --> 00:15:08.610 things, like comparing his football team to... 00:15:08.519 --> 00:15:11.700 The Germans in World War II? Not exactly a winning 00:15:11.700 --> 00:15:13.860 analogy. No kidding. And the source note reminds 00:15:13.860 --> 00:15:17.860 us who the coach of the Nazis was. Yikes. And 00:15:17.860 --> 00:15:20.179 that field is crowded, right? Very crowded. Couple 00:15:20.179 --> 00:15:22.019 of current representatives like Buddy Carter 00:15:22.019 --> 00:15:24.879 and Mike Collins. Five unknowns. And potentially 00:15:24.879 --> 00:15:27.179 several other big names might jump in. Doug Collins, 00:15:27.559 --> 00:15:30.159 Brian Jack, Kelly Loeffler, Brad Raffensperger. 00:15:30.519 --> 00:15:33.379 And also State Senator Colton Moore, who our 00:15:33.379 --> 00:15:35.539 sources describe using some very strong language 00:15:35.539 --> 00:15:38.159 regarding his views. Let's just say crazy pants 00:15:38.159 --> 00:15:41.039 racist was the phrase used. OK, moving on to 00:15:41.039 --> 00:15:42.899 Iowa. Things seem interesting there, too. Senator 00:15:42.899 --> 00:15:45.440 Joni Ernst has made some missteps, apparently. 00:15:45.720 --> 00:15:47.840 Yeah, and Iowa Democrats are smelling blood in 00:15:47.840 --> 00:15:49.779 the water. So you've got two athletes running. 00:15:50.080 --> 00:15:53.539 First, state rep J .D. Scholten. He pitched independent 00:15:53.539 --> 00:15:55.440 league baseball for the Sioux City Explorers. 00:15:55.600 --> 00:15:59.259 He's 45. Fastball around 80 MPH now. He's expected 00:15:59.259 --> 00:16:02.779 to really lean into baseball stories and analogies, 00:16:02.919 --> 00:16:04.539 you know, play on that Iowa love for baseball. 00:16:04.840 --> 00:16:06.740 Okay, an interesting angle. And the other athlete? 00:16:07.059 --> 00:16:09.960 State rep Josh Turek. He's a Paralympian. Won 00:16:09.960 --> 00:16:12.919 gold twice in wheelchair basketball. His launch 00:16:12.919 --> 00:16:16.179 ad sounds incredibly powerful, talks about developing 00:16:16.179 --> 00:16:18.500 spina bifida because his dad was exposed to Agent 00:16:18.500 --> 00:16:21.039 Orange in Vietnam, talks about relying on the 00:16:21.039 --> 00:16:23.799 VA on government school lunch programs. Wow. 00:16:24.139 --> 00:16:26.480 And he directly contrasts Senator Bob Harkin, 00:16:26.539 --> 00:16:29.080 who championed those programs, with Senator Ernst. 00:16:29.379 --> 00:16:31.659 He argues she helped gut programs to give, quote, 00:16:32.059 --> 00:16:34.860 tax cuts for Elon Musk while telling Iowans, 00:16:34.919 --> 00:16:37.980 quote, everyone is going to die. pretty sharp 00:16:37.980 --> 00:16:39.460 contract. That sounds like a very compelling 00:16:39.460 --> 00:16:41.399 narrative. OK, one more North Carolina. Looks 00:16:41.399 --> 00:16:44.259 like that race is shaping up. RNC chair Michael 00:16:44.259 --> 00:16:46.740 Whatley, who was handpicked by Donald Trump versus 00:16:46.740 --> 00:16:49.879 former Democratic governor Roy Cooper. Early 00:16:49.879 --> 00:16:52.779 polling. Emerson has Cooper up six points, 47 00:16:52.779 --> 00:16:55.320 to 41. A partisan poll admittedly still has Cooper 00:16:55.320 --> 00:16:57.779 up three. So being up three to six points this 00:16:57.779 --> 00:16:59.440 early in a purple state, that's a pretty good 00:16:59.440 --> 00:17:01.220 place to start for Cooper. So looking across 00:17:01.220 --> 00:17:04.339 all these races, Ohio, Maine, Montana, Alabama, 00:17:04.480 --> 00:17:08.410 Georgia, Iowa, North Carolina. What's the bigger 00:17:08.410 --> 00:17:10.990 picture? How do these individual contests reflect 00:17:10.990 --> 00:17:13.910 the national mood or campaign strategies? Well, 00:17:13.910 --> 00:17:15.670 I think the key takeaway is that while, yes, 00:17:15.869 --> 00:17:18.450 national trends matter, these races really highlight 00:17:18.450 --> 00:17:20.710 how important individual candidates' stories 00:17:20.710 --> 00:17:23.450 and narratives are becoming. Whether it's a former 00:17:23.450 --> 00:17:25.430 athlete's compelling personal history in Iowa, 00:17:25.849 --> 00:17:28.490 or the Trumpiest contest in Alabama, or a well 00:17:28.490 --> 00:17:30.829 -liked former governor in North Carolina, these 00:17:30.829 --> 00:17:33.089 unique elements seem increasingly central to 00:17:33.089 --> 00:17:35.549 how campaigns connect with voters, state by state. 00:17:35.710 --> 00:17:38.289 It's not just about party leaders. Right, local 00:17:38.289 --> 00:17:40.630 stories, personal connections, they really cut 00:17:40.630 --> 00:17:43.670 through. Absolutely. It shows that even in polarized 00:17:43.670 --> 00:17:46.470 times, candidates who can tell a genuine story, 00:17:46.470 --> 00:17:49.630 connect on specific issues, they can make a real 00:17:49.630 --> 00:17:51.690 difference. Okay, let's wrap up the electoral 00:17:51.690 --> 00:17:54.250 battlefield with one specific race getting a 00:17:54.250 --> 00:17:58.450 lot of attention. Zoran Mamdani's mayoral candidacy 00:17:58.450 --> 00:18:01.190 somewhere. Our sources say he's polling very 00:18:01.190 --> 00:18:03.690 well indeed. Just crushing the field, actually. 00:18:03.900 --> 00:18:06.599 This is happening despite quote much rending 00:18:06.599 --> 00:18:09.440 of garments and gnashing of teeth and the media 00:18:09.440 --> 00:18:12.539 particularly the New York Times Raking of muck 00:18:12.539 --> 00:18:14.539 from mom Donnie's past Yeah, the numbers are 00:18:14.539 --> 00:18:16.700 pretty striking seeing a poll had mom Donnie 00:18:16.700 --> 00:18:20.019 at 44 % The next closest was Andrew Cuomo running 00:18:20.019 --> 00:18:23.279 as an independent at 25 % then Republican Curtis 00:18:23.279 --> 00:18:26.440 Sliwa at 12 % and the incumbent Eric Adams also 00:18:26.440 --> 00:18:29.329 independent way down at 7 % And that wasn't just 00:18:29.329 --> 00:18:31.690 one poll. No. Consistent across others, too. 00:18:32.170 --> 00:18:35.190 Wick poll had Mom Donnie at 39, Cuomo 21. Another 00:18:35.190 --> 00:18:37.150 poll from Zenith and Public Progress was almost 00:18:37.150 --> 00:18:39.829 identical to Sienna. Mom Donnie 42, Cuomo 26. 00:18:40.269 --> 00:18:42.410 And Zenith even ran scenarios. Like, if everyone 00:18:42.410 --> 00:18:44.190 else drops out and it's just Mom Donnie versus 00:18:44.190 --> 00:18:47.349 Cuomo, Mom Donnie still wins 52 to 40. Wow. And 00:18:47.349 --> 00:18:49.690 there are only, what, 84 days left? That's not 00:18:49.690 --> 00:18:51.509 much time to close a double digit gap like that. 00:18:51.609 --> 00:18:53.970 Not much time at all. So the question becomes, 00:18:54.410 --> 00:18:57.710 If Mamdani pulls off a big win, what conclusions 00:18:57.710 --> 00:19:00.029 will the Democratic establishment, the Poobahs, 00:19:00.230 --> 00:19:03.450 draw? Our sources suggest three possibilities 00:19:03.450 --> 00:19:06.809 they might consider. What are they? First. Maybe 00:19:06.809 --> 00:19:09.569 Democratic voters actually want someone who kind 00:19:09.569 --> 00:19:11.450 of talks like Donald Trump, promising to shake 00:19:11.450 --> 00:19:13.390 things up for the little guy, disrupt the system. 00:19:13.950 --> 00:19:15.930 Interesting. Second. Second, maybe they just 00:19:15.930 --> 00:19:19.230 want someone young and social media savvy and 00:19:19.230 --> 00:19:21.829 charismatic, you know, fresh face, different 00:19:21.829 --> 00:19:24.109 energy. Makes sense. And third. And maybe the 00:19:24.109 --> 00:19:26.609 simplest or most cynical, depending on your view. 00:19:26.809 --> 00:19:29.390 Maybe Democratic voters just want someone, anyone 00:19:29.390 --> 00:19:33.599 who's not a sleazeball. OK. So the insight here 00:19:33.599 --> 00:19:36.380 is Mamdani's potential success could signal a 00:19:36.380 --> 00:19:38.400 real shift in what Democratic voters are looking 00:19:38.400 --> 00:19:41.079 for. Maybe prioritizing authenticity, challenging 00:19:41.079 --> 00:19:43.940 the status quo, personal integrity over the usual 00:19:43.940 --> 00:19:47.299 stuff like party loyalty or long resumes. Exactly. 00:19:47.380 --> 00:19:49.619 It could really influence how future Democratic 00:19:49.619 --> 00:19:52.279 campaigns think about messaging and candidate 00:19:52.279 --> 00:19:56.059 profiles. It suggests a hunger, perhaps, for 00:19:56.059 --> 00:19:58.140 a different kind of leader. What a deep dive 00:19:58.140 --> 00:20:00.839 that was. OK, so we've covered a lot. Intense 00:20:00.839 --> 00:20:03.500 political fights over redistricting really profound 00:20:03.500 --> 00:20:05.900 challenges to civil rights law. We looked at 00:20:05.900 --> 00:20:08.380 government funding clashes, academic freedom 00:20:08.380 --> 00:20:11.140 issues, and some really fascinating Senate races, 00:20:11.299 --> 00:20:14.720 plus that mayoral race. The landscape, as always, 00:20:14.880 --> 00:20:16.519 it just keeps shifting, doesn't it? It really 00:20:16.519 --> 00:20:18.549 does. And the main takeaway... Hopefully for 00:20:18.549 --> 00:20:20.569 you listening isn't just memorizing these specific 00:20:20.569 --> 00:20:22.670 facts or poll numbers. It's about seeing the 00:20:22.670 --> 00:20:24.630 connections Understanding how these different 00:20:24.630 --> 00:20:26.809 events link together critical thinking is just 00:20:26.809 --> 00:20:29.799 so key to navigating all this Absolutely. So 00:20:29.799 --> 00:20:32.420 as you maul all this over, here's a final thought 00:20:32.420 --> 00:20:34.720 for you to consider. If a candidate like Zerhan 00:20:34.720 --> 00:20:37.119 Mamdani does find success by tapping into that 00:20:37.119 --> 00:20:39.400 desire to shake up the system for the benefit 00:20:39.400 --> 00:20:41.819 of the little guy, and at the same time if the 00:20:41.819 --> 00:20:44.059 Supreme Court does keep pushing this idea of 00:20:44.059 --> 00:20:47.519 race neutrality in ways that dismantle long -standing 00:20:47.519 --> 00:20:50.349 civil rights tools, What comes next? What new 00:20:50.349 --> 00:20:52.650 forms of political action or legal strategies 00:20:52.650 --> 00:20:54.769 might emerge in response to those two powerful 00:20:54.769 --> 00:20:57.089 currents? What does the next version of shaking 00:20:57.089 --> 00:20:59.049 up the system even look like? Something to think 00:20:59.049 --> 00:20:59.369 about.