WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:03.100 Welcome to the Deep Dive. We take a stack of 00:00:03.100 --> 00:00:07.000 recent news analyses, detailed reports, and basically 00:00:07.000 --> 00:00:08.839 pull out the most important insights for you. 00:00:08.939 --> 00:00:11.519 Yeah, we try to connect the dots. Exactly. And 00:00:11.519 --> 00:00:15.800 today we're diving into the pretty turbulent 00:00:15.800 --> 00:00:19.210 waters of current U .S. politics. Our mission 00:00:19.210 --> 00:00:21.969 really is to cut through some of the noise, maybe 00:00:21.969 --> 00:00:25.210 reveal some surprising connections, and hopefully 00:00:25.210 --> 00:00:27.750 equip you with a deeper understanding of the 00:00:27.750 --> 00:00:30.010 forces shaping the American political landscape 00:00:30.010 --> 00:00:32.380 right now. And what really stands out, I think, 00:00:32.500 --> 00:00:35.380 is just the sheer breadth of the strategic maneuvering 00:00:35.380 --> 00:00:38.700 we're seeing. Everything from executive actions 00:00:38.700 --> 00:00:41.420 that are reshaping federal state power dynamics 00:00:41.420 --> 00:00:44.420 to these really intricate plays for electoral 00:00:44.420 --> 00:00:46.079 advantage. So we'll try to connect those dots 00:00:46.079 --> 00:00:48.079 between things that might seem separate, helping 00:00:48.079 --> 00:00:50.100 you understand not just what's happening, but 00:00:50.100 --> 00:00:53.320 maybe why it matters and what the deeper implications 00:00:53.320 --> 00:00:55.939 might be for American democracy. OK, we've got 00:00:55.939 --> 00:00:58.359 a lot to explore there. So maybe a good place 00:00:58.359 --> 00:01:01.159 to kick things off is looking at some of these 00:01:01.159 --> 00:01:04.700 notable instances where executive power is being, 00:01:04.700 --> 00:01:08.120 well, exerted in ways that are definitely raising 00:01:08.120 --> 00:01:11.760 some eyebrows, creating new tensions. Yeah, and 00:01:11.760 --> 00:01:13.560 this brings up a really fundamental question, 00:01:13.640 --> 00:01:15.959 doesn't it? Like, how far can executive authority 00:01:15.959 --> 00:01:20.209 actually go? before it fundamentally alters that 00:01:20.209 --> 00:01:22.489 balance of power, especially when you think about 00:01:22.489 --> 00:01:25.790 local and state governance. It's a tension we're 00:01:25.790 --> 00:01:28.010 seeing play out, you know, right now. Absolutely. 00:01:28.969 --> 00:01:31.030 Just consider the situation in Washington, D 00:01:31.030 --> 00:01:33.549 .C., for instance. We saw former President Trump 00:01:33.549 --> 00:01:35.810 deploy, what was it, 800 National Guard troops? 00:01:35.810 --> 00:01:38.250 Yeah, 800. Occupy D .C., citing what was called 00:01:38.250 --> 00:01:41.170 a non -existent crime emergency. Right, non -existent. 00:01:41.329 --> 00:01:43.510 And their duties apparently ranged from, you 00:01:43.510 --> 00:01:46.109 know, clearing homeless encampments to guarding 00:01:46.109 --> 00:01:49.620 national monuments. monuments that by all accounts 00:01:49.620 --> 00:01:52.739 weren't even under threat and just generally 00:01:52.739 --> 00:01:56.719 keeping order. And the crucial thing here I think 00:01:56.719 --> 00:01:58.859 is that this is all done against the express 00:01:58.859 --> 00:02:01.959 wishes of DC's elected mayor Muriel Bowser. Who 00:02:01.959 --> 00:02:05.140 couldn't stop them. Exactly. Because of DC's 00:02:05.140 --> 00:02:07.760 unique status she had no power to stop them. 00:02:08.159 --> 00:02:11.289 And the fallout from that action is Well, it's 00:02:11.289 --> 00:02:14.469 quite telling. It's significantly fueled these 00:02:14.469 --> 00:02:17.770 new calls for D .C. statehood. Right. The argument 00:02:17.770 --> 00:02:20.090 being, look, if D .C. were a state, a governor 00:02:20.090 --> 00:02:23.210 could probably preempt a presidential nationalization 00:02:23.210 --> 00:02:25.289 of the guard or at least challenge it more effectively 00:02:25.289 --> 00:02:28.090 in court. Makes sense. But as you might guess, 00:02:28.449 --> 00:02:31.990 Republicans have opposed this. Largely, the fear 00:02:31.990 --> 00:02:34.389 cited is that D .C. would likely elect two black 00:02:34.389 --> 00:02:36.469 Democrats to the Senate, and that would shift 00:02:36.469 --> 00:02:38.990 the balance of power there. OK. And looking ahead, 00:02:39.050 --> 00:02:41.189 the former president has hinted at doing similar 00:02:41.189 --> 00:02:44.210 things in what he reportedly called crime -ridden 00:02:44.210 --> 00:02:46.550 hellholes. Right, I remember that term. Naming 00:02:46.550 --> 00:02:50.110 large blue cities like Baltimore, Chicago, LA, 00:02:50.270 --> 00:02:53.169 New York, Oakland, places that also happen to 00:02:53.169 --> 00:02:55.490 have pretty substantial black populations that, 00:02:55.490 --> 00:02:57.590 you know, predominantly voted against him. So 00:02:57.590 --> 00:02:59.770 the perception is what? Intimidation? Well, the 00:02:59.770 --> 00:03:02.229 perceived plan or the concern is that it's meant 00:03:02.229 --> 00:03:05.150 to intimidate residents, maybe provoke mass arrests 00:03:05.150 --> 00:03:07.650 if protests happen. That's the worry being voiced. 00:03:07.879 --> 00:03:10.180 And we've already heard some pretty strong reactions 00:03:10.180 --> 00:03:12.919 from state and city leaders to that kind of rhetoric, 00:03:12.960 --> 00:03:15.340 haven't we? Oh, absolutely. Maryland Governor 00:03:15.340 --> 00:03:19.500 Wes Moore, he viewed it as using honorable men 00:03:19.500 --> 00:03:22.439 and women as pawns to distract us from his policies. 00:03:22.979 --> 00:03:25.319 Pretty strong words. Yeah. And Chicago Mayor 00:03:25.319 --> 00:03:28.460 Brandon Johnson basically urged the former president, 00:03:28.460 --> 00:03:31.500 you know, release anti -violence funds instead 00:03:31.500 --> 00:03:33.500 of intervening with troops. Right. Focus on the 00:03:33.500 --> 00:03:36.360 actual problem. Exactly. And that willingness 00:03:36.360 --> 00:03:39.919 to sort of push the boundaries of executive authority, 00:03:40.159 --> 00:03:43.120 it extends into other areas too, like this controversial 00:03:43.120 --> 00:03:45.439 ruling from the U .S. Court of Appeals for D 00:03:45.439 --> 00:03:47.819 .C. Ah, yes, the foreign aid one. That's the 00:03:47.819 --> 00:03:50.340 one. This court recently ruled that the administration 00:03:50.340 --> 00:03:52.479 can terminate billions of dollars of foreign 00:03:52.479 --> 00:03:55.219 aid, aid that was actually appropriated by Congress. 00:03:55.800 --> 00:03:59.060 Even though the Empowerment Act of 1974 explicitly 00:03:59.060 --> 00:04:01.280 forbids it. Explicitly forbids it, yeah. That 00:04:01.280 --> 00:04:03.620 seems like a huge shift in how the executive 00:04:03.620 --> 00:04:05.740 branch interacts with congressional spending. 00:04:05.949 --> 00:04:07.990 So what was the background there again? Well, 00:04:08.110 --> 00:04:10.310 the background is that Trump had frozen US -eyed 00:04:10.310 --> 00:04:13.169 spending back in January. That led the grant 00:04:13.169 --> 00:04:16.509 recipients themselves to sue. OK. And initially, 00:04:16.709 --> 00:04:19.810 a district judge actually ordered the funds released. 00:04:19.930 --> 00:04:22.009 But then the appeals court stepped in. Right. 00:04:22.370 --> 00:04:25.240 The appeals court with judges Karen LeCraft Henderson, 00:04:25.480 --> 00:04:27.759 a Bush appointee and Gregory Katz's of the Trump 00:04:27.759 --> 00:04:30.980 appointee, they ruled the plaintiffs didn't even 00:04:30.980 --> 00:04:34.519 have standing to sue. Standing. So basically 00:04:34.519 --> 00:04:36.959 they said these groups who were directly harmed 00:04:36.959 --> 00:04:39.399 by the frozen fence. Yeah. Weren't the right 00:04:39.399 --> 00:04:41.560 people to bring the lawsuit. Pretty much. Which 00:04:41.560 --> 00:04:43.839 is, you know, a critical legal maneuver because 00:04:43.839 --> 00:04:46.740 it let the court avoid ruling on the core constitutional 00:04:46.740 --> 00:04:49.079 question about executive power versus congressional 00:04:49.079 --> 00:04:51.899 power. Ah, I see. Side stepping the main issue. 00:04:52.180 --> 00:04:55.079 Exactly. And Judge Florence Pan, a Biden appointee, 00:04:55.240 --> 00:04:57.860 she dissented pretty strongly, called the majority's 00:04:57.860 --> 00:05:00.600 reasoning very artificial, given the direct harm. 00:05:01.279 --> 00:05:03.259 And her dissent really highlighted that the majority's 00:05:03.259 --> 00:05:05.939 opinion, quote, misconstrues the separation of 00:05:05.939 --> 00:05:08.879 powers claim and allows executive branch officials 00:05:08.879 --> 00:05:11.740 to evade judicial review of constitutionally 00:05:11.740 --> 00:05:14.500 impermissible actions. Wow. So if you connect 00:05:14.500 --> 00:05:17.160 that to the bigger picture, it certainly suggests 00:05:17.470 --> 00:05:20.170 potentially an erosion of Congress's power of 00:05:20.170 --> 00:05:22.670 the purse and maybe an expansion of unchecked 00:05:22.670 --> 00:05:25.509 executive power. Speaking of well unchecked power 00:05:25.509 --> 00:05:27.709 we've also seen efforts to influence cultural 00:05:27.709 --> 00:05:30.449 institutions right the Smithsonian. Yes a significant 00:05:30.449 --> 00:05:33.550 push to essentially censor Smithsonian museums. 00:05:33.769 --> 00:05:36.269 Yeah. The former president signed an executive 00:05:36.269 --> 00:05:39.170 order telling them to remove what he called bad 00:05:39.170 --> 00:05:42.810 think bad think bad think or improper ideology. 00:05:42.910 --> 00:05:45.529 And what's fascinating or perhaps concerning 00:05:45.529 --> 00:05:51.100 is the specific target, divisive, race -centered 00:05:51.100 --> 00:05:53.540 ideology. OK, what does that mean in practice? 00:05:54.160 --> 00:05:56.319 Well, it suggests that exhibits dealing with 00:05:56.319 --> 00:05:58.800 things like slavery, the treatment of slaves, 00:05:59.199 --> 00:06:00.660 the slave -owning founding fathers, Washington, 00:06:00.860 --> 00:06:03.740 Jefferson, or the historical treatment of Native 00:06:03.740 --> 00:06:05.800 Americans, Japanese Americans, Chinese Americans, 00:06:06.720 --> 00:06:09.199 that these might be unwelcome. So controlling 00:06:09.199 --> 00:06:10.980 the narrative. Controlling the narrative. And 00:06:10.980 --> 00:06:13.540 that term bad think, it's notably borrowed from 00:06:13.540 --> 00:06:16.560 George Orwell's 1984. which signals an attempt 00:06:16.560 --> 00:06:19.240 not just to challenge, but maybe to actively 00:06:19.240 --> 00:06:22.560 suppress and redefine the stories told by public 00:06:22.560 --> 00:06:25.899 institutions, shaping them purely to one political 00:06:25.899 --> 00:06:28.439 viewpoint. The House administration committee 00:06:28.439 --> 00:06:30.879 actually stated this aims to have the Smithsonian 00:06:30.879 --> 00:06:34.139 shaped solely by the views and ideology of one 00:06:34.139 --> 00:06:36.959 individual as a means of expanding his political 00:06:36.959 --> 00:06:39.620 power. And there's precedent for this kind of 00:06:39.620 --> 00:06:41.779 direct political interference, isn't there? The 00:06:41.779 --> 00:06:44.019 National Portrait Gallery director? That's right, 00:06:44.079 --> 00:06:46.360 Kim Sage. the former president tried to fire 00:06:46.360 --> 00:06:49.000 her back in May, and she ended up resigning under 00:06:49.000 --> 00:06:51.899 pressure just two weeks later. Wow. So it certainly 00:06:51.899 --> 00:06:54.579 demonstrates a willingness to apply that direct 00:06:54.579 --> 00:06:57.540 pressure to cultural institutions if they don't 00:06:57.540 --> 00:07:00.240 align with a particular ideology. Okay, so we've 00:07:00.240 --> 00:07:03.060 just seen how executive power is being stretched, 00:07:03.259 --> 00:07:05.500 maybe tested, in some pretty unprecedented ways. 00:07:05.620 --> 00:07:08.660 Troop deployments, foreign aid freezes, influencing 00:07:08.660 --> 00:07:11.500 museums. Yeah. But that's just one side of this 00:07:11.500 --> 00:07:14.259 battle for control, right? Exactly. which is 00:07:14.259 --> 00:07:17.120 equally crucial, is how the actual rules of electoral 00:07:17.120 --> 00:07:20.040 engagement are being... well, aggressively reshaped. 00:07:20.500 --> 00:07:22.759 Yeah, and the broader implication here, I think, 00:07:22.839 --> 00:07:25.720 is a clear effort to use institutional power 00:07:25.720 --> 00:07:29.240 to lock in electoral advantages, maybe regardless 00:07:29.240 --> 00:07:32.480 of shifts in popular support. How so? It's about 00:07:32.480 --> 00:07:35.060 trying to secure majorities by sort of designing 00:07:35.060 --> 00:07:38.019 the system, not just by winning over voters election 00:07:38.019 --> 00:07:39.959 by election. OK, give us an example. Well, a 00:07:39.959 --> 00:07:42.379 prime example is the ongoing redistricting wars. 00:07:42.639 --> 00:07:45.360 You know, traditionally, good government groups 00:07:45.360 --> 00:07:48.259 like Common Cause have always pushed for independent 00:07:48.259 --> 00:07:50.500 redistricting commissions, fair maps. Right, 00:07:50.600 --> 00:07:52.019 that was their whole thing. That was their whole 00:07:52.019 --> 00:07:55.220 thing. But now they've had this huge change of 00:07:55.220 --> 00:07:57.100 heart. They're actually advocating for tit -for 00:07:57.100 --> 00:07:59.500 -tat gerrymandering in blue states. Seriously, 00:07:59.699 --> 00:08:02.819 tit -for -tat? Tit -for -tat. It's framed as 00:08:02.819 --> 00:08:06.100 a direct strategic response to what they see 00:08:06.100 --> 00:08:08.819 as maximal gerrymandering happening in red states 00:08:08.819 --> 00:08:11.339 like Texas, for example. Wow, that is a huge 00:08:11.339 --> 00:08:13.759 shift for a group like Common Cause. It's massive. 00:08:14.040 --> 00:08:16.160 And this shift isn't just tactical, you know. 00:08:16.160 --> 00:08:19.060 It kind of reveals a troubling concession, maybe, 00:08:19.379 --> 00:08:21.879 that in today's political landscape, even groups 00:08:21.879 --> 00:08:25.100 dedicated to fair play feel forced to adopt the 00:08:25.100 --> 00:08:27.899 very tactics they normally oppose. Fighting fire 00:08:27.899 --> 00:08:30.139 with fire. Essentially, it's an acknowledgement 00:08:30.139 --> 00:08:33.600 that the fight, in their view, now requires that. 00:08:33.960 --> 00:08:36.960 And the real aha moment for you, the listener, 00:08:37.440 --> 00:08:39.960 might be understanding just how deeply the system 00:08:39.960 --> 00:08:42.639 seems to have been warped, moving away from those 00:08:42.639 --> 00:08:46.279 ideals of fair representation. And Common Cause 00:08:46.279 --> 00:08:48.940 has even drawn up guidelines for this new approach. 00:08:49.320 --> 00:08:52.220 They're suggesting things like mid -decade redistricting 00:08:52.220 --> 00:08:55.100 that's proportional to what red states do with 00:08:55.100 --> 00:08:57.820 public approval. And this is crucial, no dilution 00:08:57.820 --> 00:09:01.259 of minority voices, which could get tricky because 00:09:01.259 --> 00:09:03.159 it might imply racial gerrymandering, something 00:09:03.159 --> 00:09:05.799 the Supreme Court has outlawed. They also still 00:09:05.799 --> 00:09:08.220 advocate for the John Lewis Voting Rights Act 00:09:08.220 --> 00:09:10.580 and National Independent Commissions long term, 00:09:10.899 --> 00:09:13.899 with any new maps expiring with the 2030 census. 00:09:14.860 --> 00:09:17.440 for the maps themselves. Yeah, desirable criteria 00:09:17.440 --> 00:09:20.679 like districts being compact, you know, not sprawling 00:09:20.679 --> 00:09:23.179 all over the place and trying not to split counties 00:09:23.179 --> 00:09:25.720 unless it's unavoidable. Okay, so if this battle 00:09:25.720 --> 00:09:28.990 goes to... the absolute max, as they put it, 00:09:29.269 --> 00:09:32.029 who actually benefits? Does this favor one party 00:09:32.029 --> 00:09:34.509 over the other? Well, the analysis suggests it 00:09:34.509 --> 00:09:37.009 actually favors Republicans overall. Really? 00:09:37.169 --> 00:09:40.309 Why? Because many blue states, like Illinois 00:09:40.309 --> 00:09:43.129 and Maryland, are described as being almost maxed 00:09:43.129 --> 00:09:45.450 out on gerrymandering already. There isn't much 00:09:45.450 --> 00:09:47.289 more room for them to squeeze out extra seats. 00:09:47.970 --> 00:09:51.090 Whereas red states like Texas, Florida, Missouri, 00:09:51.409 --> 00:09:54.629 Ohio. They apparently have more potential seats 00:09:54.629 --> 00:09:56.710 they could gain through aggressive redistricting. 00:09:57.389 --> 00:10:00.750 California and New York are seen as the big blue 00:10:00.750 --> 00:10:03.350 treasure troves, but New York's impact would 00:10:03.350 --> 00:10:06.169 be delayed until 2028 anyway. And what's the 00:10:06.169 --> 00:10:08.289 practical effect of all this maximum gerrymandering? 00:10:08.450 --> 00:10:10.429 It's pretty startling, actually. It could lead 00:10:10.429 --> 00:10:13.350 to only a tiny handful of truly competitive house 00:10:13.350 --> 00:10:17.700 districts nationwide, maybe like. 25 out of 435? 00:10:18.059 --> 00:10:20.500 Only 25. Yeah, making most races basically a 00:10:20.500 --> 00:10:22.460 foregone conclusion before voting even starts. 00:10:22.960 --> 00:10:24.580 You know, think about some current competitive 00:10:24.580 --> 00:10:26.740 seats in states where neither party controls 00:10:26.740 --> 00:10:31.259 everything like NC11, PA08, VA01, MI10, AZ01, 00:10:31.440 --> 00:10:35.340 NV03, KSO3, MNO2, and just imagine how few of 00:10:35.340 --> 00:10:37.000 those would be left. That really changes the 00:10:37.000 --> 00:10:39.860 nature of House elections. And this sounds like 00:10:39.860 --> 00:10:42.960 it could be part of a larger, maybe more coordinated 00:10:42.960 --> 00:10:46.240 strategy. I've seen reports about GOP operatives 00:10:46.240 --> 00:10:49.840 openly discussing a plan to gain, what, 40 house 00:10:49.840 --> 00:10:52.419 seats without actually winning more votes? Yes, 00:10:52.519 --> 00:10:54.980 that's being discussed quite openly. It's a truly 00:10:54.980 --> 00:10:58.179 significant plan. A GOP strategist named Alex 00:10:58.179 --> 00:11:00.759 DeGrasse apparently outlined what he called three 00:11:00.759 --> 00:11:03.620 vectors for achieving this. Three vectors. OK, 00:11:03.700 --> 00:11:06.340 what are they? OK, first, partisan gerrymandering, 00:11:06.419 --> 00:11:08.980 which we just talked about. Texas alone pushing 00:11:08.980 --> 00:11:12.080 to create maybe five new GOP House seats. Right. 00:11:12.340 --> 00:11:14.700 Second, a desired Supreme Court ruling on the 00:11:14.700 --> 00:11:17.299 Voting Rights Act. Specifically, Republicans 00:11:17.299 --> 00:11:19.620 are hoping for what are called a maximalist ruling 00:11:19.620 --> 00:11:23.639 on Section 2 of the VRA. Section 2. That's the 00:11:23.639 --> 00:11:25.720 part that bans race -based discrimination in 00:11:25.720 --> 00:11:27.860 voting laws. Exactly. A maximalist ruling could 00:11:27.860 --> 00:11:30.320 potentially dilute the voting power of minority 00:11:30.320 --> 00:11:33.360 voters, maybe effectively eliminating many of 00:11:33.360 --> 00:11:36.220 those 119 majority minority districts. OK, explain 00:11:36.220 --> 00:11:39.220 majority minority districts quickly. Sure. They're 00:11:39.220 --> 00:11:41.580 electoral districts drawn specifically so that 00:11:41.580 --> 00:11:45.000 a racial or ethnic minority group actually makes 00:11:45.000 --> 00:11:47.460 up the majority of the voting population. Yeah. 00:11:47.600 --> 00:11:50.279 The idea is to make it possible for them to elect 00:11:50.279 --> 00:11:53.500 representatives they prefer. Got it. So undermining 00:11:53.500 --> 00:11:56.240 those could drastically change representation 00:11:56.240 --> 00:11:58.379 for those communities. Fundamentally alter it. 00:11:58.379 --> 00:12:01.419 Yeah. The argument being put forward is whether 00:12:01.419 --> 00:12:04.139 these race based seats, as they're sometimes 00:12:04.139 --> 00:12:06.720 called, violate the 14th and 15th amendments. 00:12:07.230 --> 00:12:09.690 And it's worth remembering, the current Supreme 00:12:09.690 --> 00:12:12.789 Court, which is Republican -dominated, has steadily 00:12:12.789 --> 00:12:15.470 chipped away at the VRA over the years, most 00:12:15.470 --> 00:12:17.570 notably in the Shelby County Beholder decision 00:12:17.570 --> 00:12:20.429 back in 2013. Right. That basically gutted the 00:12:20.429 --> 00:12:22.850 pre -clearance requirement. Exactly. So the potential 00:12:22.850 --> 00:12:26.009 impact here is huge diminishing minority voting 00:12:26.009 --> 00:12:28.450 power, changing who gets elected. It really could 00:12:28.450 --> 00:12:30.669 feel like a different set of rules. OK, so that's 00:12:30.669 --> 00:12:32.970 gerrymandering and the VRA challenge. What's 00:12:32.970 --> 00:12:35.279 the third vector in this strategy? The third 00:12:35.279 --> 00:12:38.970 part is perhaps the most audacious. An unprecedented 00:12:38.970 --> 00:12:42.210 mid -decade census. A mid -decade census. I didn't 00:12:42.210 --> 00:12:44.389 even know that was a thing. Well, it's not usually. 00:12:44.750 --> 00:12:47.409 Donald Trump ordered a new one. And Stephen Miller 00:12:47.409 --> 00:12:51.169 claimed Democrats rigged the 2020 census by including 00:12:51.169 --> 00:12:54.830 illegal aliens, arguing that, quote, 20 to 30 00:12:54.830 --> 00:12:57.990 House Democrat seats wouldn't exist but for illegal 00:12:57.990 --> 00:13:01.129 aliens. And Charlie Kirk even suggested this 00:13:01.129 --> 00:13:04.230 could, quote, subtract 20 electoral votes from 00:13:04.230 --> 00:13:07.950 Democrats. Wow. So this mid -decade census, I 00:13:07.950 --> 00:13:10.409 mean, it sounds incredibly ambitious, maybe even 00:13:10.409 --> 00:13:13.110 legally questionable. Is there any historical 00:13:13.110 --> 00:13:16.269 or legal basis for this? Or is it mostly a political 00:13:16.269 --> 00:13:18.110 play? That's the crucial question, isn't it? 00:13:18.409 --> 00:13:20.210 Historically, non -citizens have been counted 00:13:20.210 --> 00:13:23.269 in every census since 1790. The Constitution 00:13:23.269 --> 00:13:25.210 itself calls for counting the whole number of 00:13:25.210 --> 00:13:28.039 persons. The whole number. not just citizens. 00:13:28.360 --> 00:13:30.240 Right. And furthermore, federal law explicitly 00:13:30.240 --> 00:13:32.759 states a mid -decade census cannot be used for 00:13:32.759 --> 00:13:34.940 apportionment, meaning deciding how many house 00:13:34.940 --> 00:13:37.200 seats each state gets. So legally, it sounds 00:13:37.200 --> 00:13:39.779 pretty shaky. Highly contentious. It would almost 00:13:39.779 --> 00:13:42.460 certainly face immediate court challenges. So, 00:13:42.580 --> 00:13:44.399 yeah, you could argue it's primarily a political 00:13:44.399 --> 00:13:46.779 move designed to create a narrative, maybe justify 00:13:46.779 --> 00:13:49.200 future actions, regardless of its actual legal 00:13:49.200 --> 00:13:52.330 standing right now. Okay, so... Given all these 00:13:52.330 --> 00:13:55.350 strategies, the gerrymandering, the VRA challenges, 00:13:55.570 --> 00:13:58.899 this potential mid -decade census, What's the 00:13:58.899 --> 00:14:00.879 Democratic response been? Are they aware of this? 00:14:00.919 --> 00:14:03.460 Oh, they're aware Texas State Representative 00:14:03.460 --> 00:14:05.779 Vinton Jones, who's the house minority whip there 00:14:05.779 --> 00:14:09.139 I urge national Democrats to wake up to what 00:14:09.139 --> 00:14:11.559 he called this bigger plan wake up Yeah, and 00:14:11.559 --> 00:14:14.519 be ready for a major electoral fight. He noted 00:14:14.519 --> 00:14:16.799 that quote. They don't always play by the rules 00:14:16.799 --> 00:14:18.700 They just change the rules to make it benefit 00:14:18.700 --> 00:14:21.259 them. It's a direct acknowledgement of the high 00:14:21.259 --> 00:14:24.100 stakes here a very stark warning Okay, so beyond 00:14:24.100 --> 00:14:26.899 these legal and legislative battles these structural 00:14:26.899 --> 00:14:29.710 fights There's also the, well, equally complex 00:14:29.710 --> 00:14:32.470 battle for hearts and minds, right? What are 00:14:32.470 --> 00:14:35.429 voters really thinking? And how are parties trying 00:14:35.429 --> 00:14:38.210 or maybe failing to connect? Yeah, and this raises 00:14:38.210 --> 00:14:40.049 another important question, doesn't it? In this 00:14:40.049 --> 00:14:42.289 world of just information overload, where narratives 00:14:42.289 --> 00:14:45.610 can be shaped so easily, how do parties actually 00:14:45.610 --> 00:14:47.690 communicate effectively? How do they address 00:14:47.690 --> 00:14:50.269 the core concerns of an electorate that's diverse 00:14:50.269 --> 00:14:53.620 and, frankly, sometimes inconsistent? Right. 00:14:54.200 --> 00:14:55.899 Well, Sarah Longwell's focus groups with these 00:14:55.899 --> 00:14:59.379 so -called Biden to Trump voters, B2T voters, 00:14:59.980 --> 00:15:01.879 offer some really striking insights here. Yes, 00:15:01.879 --> 00:15:04.600 I saw that research. She found that these voters, 00:15:05.159 --> 00:15:08.000 they already know Trump's flaws. So just pointing 00:15:08.000 --> 00:15:10.500 them out again and again, it's useless. Doesn't 00:15:10.500 --> 00:15:12.940 move the needle. Exactly. What really stands 00:15:12.940 --> 00:15:16.240 out is their perception, right or wrong, that 00:15:16.240 --> 00:15:20.210 Trump is fundamentally for them. while they perceive 00:15:20.210 --> 00:15:22.929 Democrats as being for minorities, gay people, 00:15:23.009 --> 00:15:26.330 and trans people, and crucially, not for ordinary 00:15:26.330 --> 00:15:29.169 white working people. That's the perception she 00:15:29.169 --> 00:15:31.149 found. And their number one demand, what did 00:15:31.149 --> 00:15:33.870 they want most? Unambiguously, for prices to 00:15:33.870 --> 00:15:36.850 go down. The economy, always the economy. Trump 00:15:36.850 --> 00:15:40.049 promises this. Democrats. Well, they tend not 00:15:40.049 --> 00:15:42.850 to make that direct promise, maybe because they 00:15:42.850 --> 00:15:44.570 know they can't just wave a magic wand and make 00:15:44.570 --> 00:15:46.809 it happen. Right. It's complicated. And Senator 00:15:46.809 --> 00:15:49.669 Bernie Sanders is maybe one of the few voices 00:15:49.669 --> 00:15:52.490 consistently talking about raising wages as another 00:15:52.490 --> 00:15:55.210 way to tackle economic pressure. So Longwell's 00:15:55.210 --> 00:15:57.909 advice for Democrats was pretty blunt, wasn't 00:15:57.909 --> 00:16:00.590 it? Very blunt, basically. Drop all the identity 00:16:00.590 --> 00:16:02.809 politics stuff and also drop attacking Trump. 00:16:03.669 --> 00:16:07.110 Instead, she says, focus intensely, laser -like 00:16:07.110 --> 00:16:10.330 on making life better for working people. And 00:16:10.330 --> 00:16:11.909 there's data backing this up, right, that Wall 00:16:11.909 --> 00:16:13.750 Street Journal poll? Yeah, showing only about 00:16:13.750 --> 00:16:16.110 a third of the electorate has a favorable view 00:16:16.110 --> 00:16:17.950 of the Democratic Party right now. That makes 00:16:17.950 --> 00:16:20.929 it incredibly hard to win outside of solidly 00:16:20.929 --> 00:16:23.590 blue areas. And what about Kamala Harris? How 00:16:23.590 --> 00:16:27.090 did these B2T voters view her? Well, some expressed 00:16:27.090 --> 00:16:29.409 discomfort with the idea of her being, quote, 00:16:29.649 --> 00:16:31.870 foisted on them without a primary. They felt 00:16:31.870 --> 00:16:33.970 they didn't really understand her or trust her. 00:16:34.070 --> 00:16:36.210 Whereas Trump was clearer on certain issues. 00:16:36.350 --> 00:16:38.490 Yeah, Trump was seen as clear, lower prices, 00:16:38.649 --> 00:16:41.870 deport illegal immigrants. Harris, perhaps due 00:16:41.870 --> 00:16:44.490 to party divisions, avoided promising lower prices 00:16:44.490 --> 00:16:46.590 directly and seemed hesitant on the immigration 00:16:46.590 --> 00:16:49.190 front. And for these specific voters, the focus 00:16:49.190 --> 00:16:52.649 on issues like DEI, LGBTQ rights, trans issues, 00:16:52.809 --> 00:16:55.190 it made them feel like Democrats weren't prioritizing. 00:16:55.049 --> 00:16:58.269 their economic worries. What's also fascinating, 00:16:58.309 --> 00:17:01.850 though, is how inconsistent voters can be, almost 00:17:01.850 --> 00:17:04.089 contradictory sometimes. Oh, absolutely. Like, 00:17:04.390 --> 00:17:06.579 many voters say Democrats are too old. But Trump 00:17:06.579 --> 00:17:10.519 was 78 on Election Day 2024, Harris is 60. Right. 00:17:10.900 --> 00:17:12.759 And they often miss things like Nancy Pelosi 00:17:12.759 --> 00:17:15.400 stepping down from leadership. It suggests maybe 00:17:15.400 --> 00:17:17.319 there's a need for younger Democratic nominees 00:17:17.319 --> 00:17:19.400 in the future, people in their 40s, perhaps. 00:17:19.460 --> 00:17:21.900 It's possible. And that inconsistency plays out 00:17:21.900 --> 00:17:24.259 in really personal stories, too. Like, consider 00:17:24.259 --> 00:17:27.640 Brad Bartel, his wife, a Peruvian immigrant, 00:17:28.119 --> 00:17:30.799 gets arrested, sent to a detention center for 00:17:30.799 --> 00:17:33.849 overstaying her visa. right after their honeymoon. 00:17:34.289 --> 00:17:36.750 Wow. Yet he still adamantly supports Trump and 00:17:36.750 --> 00:17:39.509 his policies, says seemingly nothing could change 00:17:39.509 --> 00:17:42.329 his mind. That's hard to square. It is. Or think 00:17:42.329 --> 00:17:44.430 about farmers. Many Trump -supporting farmers 00:17:44.430 --> 00:17:46.970 were hit hard financially by his tariffs. Right, 00:17:47.089 --> 00:17:49.329 the trade wars. Yeah. But they still support 00:17:49.329 --> 00:17:51.130 him, often saying they believe other countries 00:17:51.130 --> 00:17:53.630 are taking advantage of the U .S. So the takeaway 00:17:53.630 --> 00:17:56.450 here is... Well, voters can be inconsistent. 00:17:56.589 --> 00:17:58.589 What they say doesn't always perfectly align 00:17:58.589 --> 00:18:00.869 with their personal impact or even their stated 00:18:00.869 --> 00:18:04.690 preferences sometimes. But that concern about 00:18:04.690 --> 00:18:07.769 the cost of living, that remains a pretty consistent 00:18:07.769 --> 00:18:10.230 and major driver for a lot of people. OK, so 00:18:10.230 --> 00:18:12.710 this brings us neatly to Kentucky Governor Andy 00:18:12.710 --> 00:18:15.829 Beshear. He seems to be tackling this Democratic 00:18:15.829 --> 00:18:18.220 messaging challenge in a different way. Yeah, 00:18:18.259 --> 00:18:21.000 he apparently made quite an impression on donors 00:18:21.000 --> 00:18:23.339 and vulnerable House Democrats at a fundraiser 00:18:23.339 --> 00:18:25.539 out in California. What was his core message? 00:18:25.740 --> 00:18:28.039 Pretty simple and direct. Stick to their values. 00:18:28.460 --> 00:18:31.359 Faking it doesn't work. Authenticity. Authenticity. 00:18:31.619 --> 00:18:34.140 He cited his own experience vetoing what he called 00:18:34.140 --> 00:18:37.539 a nasty bathroom bill in Kentucky, a red state, 00:18:37.819 --> 00:18:39.900 and still winning re -election by five points. 00:18:40.190 --> 00:18:43.509 Proof, he argued, that voters value that authenticity 00:18:43.509 --> 00:18:46.309 over just political calculation. And his communication 00:18:46.309 --> 00:18:49.049 skills. He advised speaking like a normal person, 00:18:49.250 --> 00:18:51.109 you know, not like a politically correct campaign 00:18:51.109 --> 00:18:53.789 consultant, using words like addiction instead 00:18:53.789 --> 00:18:56.329 of maybe substance abuse disorder, just more 00:18:56.329 --> 00:18:59.369 direct language. Interesting. It kind of evokes 00:18:59.369 --> 00:19:03.009 memories of other moderate small state governors 00:19:03.009 --> 00:19:05.059 who became president, doesn't it? like Carter 00:19:05.059 --> 00:19:07.980 or Clinton. It does a contrast to maybe more 00:19:07.980 --> 00:19:10.559 overtly progressive nominees like George McGovern 00:19:10.559 --> 00:19:14.730 in 72 or Walter Mondale in 84 who You know, suffered 00:19:14.730 --> 00:19:17.210 huge defeats. But there was also a warning at 00:19:17.210 --> 00:19:19.390 that same fundraiser, right, from the pollster 00:19:19.390 --> 00:19:22.750 David Shor. Yes, a very blunt warning. Shor apparently 00:19:22.750 --> 00:19:24.930 told the donors, look, your priorities don't 00:19:24.930 --> 00:19:28.049 always align with voters priorities. Ouch. Yeah. 00:19:28.329 --> 00:19:30.789 And he specifically warned that young people, 00:19:31.029 --> 00:19:33.190 especially non -college men and minorities, are, 00:19:33.190 --> 00:19:36.109 quote, fleeing the Democratic Party in droves. 00:19:36.349 --> 00:19:38.990 Fleeing in droves. That's a stark reality check. 00:19:39.170 --> 00:19:41.170 Definitely a wake up call for the party. OK, 00:19:41.170 --> 00:19:43.750 so we look at federal power electoral strategies 00:19:43.750 --> 00:19:46.609 voter mindsets. Let's shift gears slightly one 00:19:46.609 --> 00:19:48.549 more time. Let's look at another front in this 00:19:48.549 --> 00:19:51.390 federal -state dynamic, specifically how a state 00:19:51.390 --> 00:19:53.609 like California is trying to carve out its own 00:19:53.609 --> 00:19:56.400 path, particularly on environmental issues. Yeah, 00:19:56.500 --> 00:19:59.339 and what's really fascinating here is how creative 00:19:59.339 --> 00:20:03.900 states are getting in trying to essentially Trump 00:20:03.900 --> 00:20:06.680 proof their own policies when federal action 00:20:06.680 --> 00:20:09.180 is blocked or challenged. States taking matters 00:20:09.180 --> 00:20:11.579 into their own hands. Exactly. So California 00:20:11.579 --> 00:20:14.859 has long wanted to enforce its own often stricter 00:20:14.859 --> 00:20:17.640 environmental standards. In 2023, they actually 00:20:17.640 --> 00:20:21.309 got a voluntary deal with four. big heavy duty 00:20:21.309 --> 00:20:23.589 truck manufacturer. Right, the zero emission 00:20:23.589 --> 00:20:25.809 standard. Yeah, to keep meeting California's 00:20:25.809 --> 00:20:27.950 zero emission standard, regardless of what federal 00:20:27.950 --> 00:20:31.609 law said. Right. But then the FTC recently declared 00:20:31.609 --> 00:20:34.109 that agreement unenforceable. Through a wrench 00:20:34.109 --> 00:20:36.809 in the works. Yeah. So what now for California? 00:20:37.029 --> 00:20:38.990 Well, despite that setback, California still 00:20:38.990 --> 00:20:41.309 has other tools in its toolbox. For instance, 00:20:41.329 --> 00:20:43.750 they could ban state agencies from buying gasoline 00:20:43.750 --> 00:20:45.910 powered trucks after a certain date. Use their 00:20:45.910 --> 00:20:48.509 purchasing power. Exactly. Or they could offer 00:20:48.509 --> 00:20:51.190 big incentives for pr... companies to buy electric 00:20:51.190 --> 00:20:54.529 trucks, make it financially attractive, or maybe 00:20:54.529 --> 00:20:57.150 impose a sales tax specifically on gasoline -powered 00:20:57.150 --> 00:21:00.609 trucks but not on electric ones. Create an economic 00:21:00.609 --> 00:21:03.569 disincentive. Interesting. So using state level 00:21:03.569 --> 00:21:06.250 policy levers. Right. And this kind of coordinated 00:21:06.250 --> 00:21:09.269 state action, it highlights a really fascinating 00:21:09.269 --> 00:21:11.569 parallel to federalism, doesn't it? Yeah. Even 00:21:11.569 --> 00:21:13.809 as the executive branch might push to centralize 00:21:13.809 --> 00:21:16.789 power. Progressive states are increasingly looking 00:21:16.789 --> 00:21:19.509 for ways to use their collective market strength, 00:21:19.650 --> 00:21:22.289 their combined economic power, as a kind of de 00:21:22.289 --> 00:21:26.190 facto regulatory body. Sort of mini federal standard 00:21:26.190 --> 00:21:29.130 setting group. Exactly. When the national avenues 00:21:29.130 --> 00:21:32.130 are blocked, if multiple blue were to team up 00:21:32.130 --> 00:21:34.990 and quickly implement similar measures. Their 00:21:34.990 --> 00:21:37.549 sheer market size could seriously encourage truck 00:21:37.549 --> 00:21:40.630 companies to produce more electric options, even 00:21:40.630 --> 00:21:43.930 without a formal, enforceable federal deal. It's 00:21:43.930 --> 00:21:46.349 a real demonstration of decentralized resistance, 00:21:46.349 --> 00:21:48.710 you could say. Okay, so we've covered a lot of 00:21:48.710 --> 00:21:50.210 ground here. What does this all mean for you, 00:21:50.230 --> 00:21:52.579 the listener? We've taken a pretty deep dive 00:21:52.579 --> 00:21:56.059 into these complex, sometimes unsettling strategies 00:21:56.059 --> 00:21:58.680 shaping U .S. politics right now. Yeah, from 00:21:58.680 --> 00:22:00.720 executive actions really pushing the boundaries 00:22:00.720 --> 00:22:03.200 of federal power, maybe challenging democratic 00:22:03.200 --> 00:22:06.119 norms. To this high stakes game of electoral 00:22:06.119 --> 00:22:09.940 engineering, trying to design outcomes, secure 00:22:09.940 --> 00:22:13.359 majorities for... decades, potentially. Right. 00:22:13.759 --> 00:22:17.099 And we've also tried to unpack the complex, sometimes 00:22:17.099 --> 00:22:19.720 contradictory motivations of voters and that 00:22:19.720 --> 00:22:22.059 ongoing struggle for political parties to really 00:22:22.059 --> 00:22:24.039 understand and connect with them. The broader 00:22:24.039 --> 00:22:27.299 implication, it seems, is pretty clear. The current 00:22:27.299 --> 00:22:30.119 political climate is defined by this intensifying 00:22:30.119 --> 00:22:32.819 battle for institutional control. Yeah, and a 00:22:32.819 --> 00:22:36.500 willingness by some actors to fundamentally redraw 00:22:36.500 --> 00:22:39.119 the rules of engagement, often outside those 00:22:39.119 --> 00:22:41.460 traditional legislative processes we expect. 00:22:41.720 --> 00:22:43.420 This isn't just about winning the next election 00:22:43.420 --> 00:22:45.859 cycle. It feels like it's about shaping the very 00:22:45.859 --> 00:22:48.140 structure of American democracy itself. And these 00:22:48.140 --> 00:22:50.079 forces are constantly interacting, aren't they? 00:22:50.380 --> 00:22:52.519 Creating this really dynamic, often unpredictable 00:22:52.519 --> 00:22:54.900 environment. So for you, the listener, understanding 00:22:54.900 --> 00:22:57.279 these underlying currents, these deeper strategies, 00:22:57.680 --> 00:23:00.039 it's really key to navigating the daily news 00:23:00.039 --> 00:23:01.980 and forming your own will and informed opinions. 00:23:02.400 --> 00:23:04.579 Which really brings us to a final maybe provocative 00:23:04.579 --> 00:23:07.000 question to leave you with. In a political landscape 00:23:07.000 --> 00:23:09.619 where the actual rules of engagement seem increasingly 00:23:09.619 --> 00:23:12.359 contested and where public perception can be 00:23:12.359 --> 00:23:15.539 so contradictory, what responsibility does the 00:23:15.539 --> 00:23:17.660 informed citizen have? How do we critically evaluate 00:23:17.660 --> 00:23:20.339 how power is being acquired and wielded? And 00:23:20.339 --> 00:23:22.200 maybe what is true democratic accountability 00:23:22.200 --> 00:23:23.619 even look like in this new era?