WEBVTT 00:00:00.000 --> 00:00:02.859 I ever feel like the news is just a fire hose, 00:00:03.040 --> 00:00:05.960 just spraying you with this overwhelming torrent 00:00:05.960 --> 00:00:08.759 of information every single day. Oh, absolutely. 00:00:09.140 --> 00:00:11.699 It's hard to keep up. Well, today, we're not 00:00:11.699 --> 00:00:14.560 just taking a sick. We're diving deep into a 00:00:14.560 --> 00:00:17.339 really fascinating stack of your recent sources. 00:00:18.239 --> 00:00:21.100 Our mission to cut through the noise, pull out 00:00:21.100 --> 00:00:25.140 the most important nuggets, and connect the dots. 00:00:25.770 --> 00:00:28.489 across headlines that might seem totally unrelated. 00:00:29.109 --> 00:00:32.149 We're talking everything from high -stakes legal 00:00:32.149 --> 00:00:34.649 battles and federal health policy, all the way 00:00:34.649 --> 00:00:37.750 to global energy showdowns and the shifting sands 00:00:37.750 --> 00:00:40.270 of American politics. And it's compelling, isn't 00:00:40.270 --> 00:00:42.070 it, how these individual stories, when you look 00:00:42.070 --> 00:00:44.530 at them together, you really paint a much richer 00:00:44.530 --> 00:00:46.929 picture of the complex paradynamics at play. 00:00:46.950 --> 00:00:49.090 Definitely. We'll be exploring how these different 00:00:49.090 --> 00:00:51.469 forces are reshaping, well... the very nature 00:00:51.469 --> 00:00:53.689 of governance, both here at home and internationally. 00:00:54.090 --> 00:00:57.909 This deep dive, it really encourages us to think 00:00:57.909 --> 00:00:59.770 critically, doesn't it, about the underlying 00:00:59.770 --> 00:01:02.630 motivations, the potential ripple effects, getting 00:01:02.630 --> 00:01:05.829 beyond just the surface headlines. Exactly. So 00:01:05.829 --> 00:01:07.890 grab your favorite beverage, because we're about 00:01:07.890 --> 00:01:10.890 to make you incredibly well -informed on some 00:01:10.890 --> 00:01:13.670 truly surprising developments. Let's get into 00:01:13.670 --> 00:01:16.560 it. OK. First up, we're starting with a story 00:01:16.560 --> 00:01:18.700 that has some pretty significant implications. 00:01:19.180 --> 00:01:21.840 We're talking public health, scientific integrity, 00:01:22.340 --> 00:01:24.879 even the structure of federal appointments. It's 00:01:24.879 --> 00:01:27.780 about Dr. Susan Monteres. She just started as 00:01:27.780 --> 00:01:29.840 the director of the CDC. the Centers for Disease 00:01:29.840 --> 00:01:34.019 Control, on July 31st. But multiple reports suggest 00:01:34.019 --> 00:01:36.000 she's already on the chopping block. Already? 00:01:36.260 --> 00:01:38.840 Wow. And the reason? Well, it seems to be a fundamental 00:01:38.840 --> 00:01:41.459 disagreement with HHS Secretary Robert Kennedy 00:01:41.459 --> 00:01:44.760 Jr. on vaccine policy. Yeah, OK. That explains 00:01:44.760 --> 00:01:47.239 a lot. Monteres, she's a medical doctor, right? 00:01:47.640 --> 00:01:49.519 She operates in the scientific consensus, vaccines 00:01:49.519 --> 00:01:53.010 save lives. Kennedy, however, Well, he keeps 00:01:53.010 --> 00:01:55.150 citing this retracted article. A fraudulent one. 00:01:55.290 --> 00:01:57.250 Yeah, by an author whose medical license was 00:01:57.250 --> 00:01:59.989 revoked, claiming vaccines cause autism. This 00:01:59.989 --> 00:02:03.750 single, completely discredited piece of evidence 00:02:03.750 --> 00:02:06.209 seems to be the basis for his entire national 00:02:06.209 --> 00:02:09.120 vaccine policy. That situation, it really highlights 00:02:09.120 --> 00:02:11.580 a critical tension, doesn't it? The independence 00:02:11.580 --> 00:02:14.060 of scientific institutions versus, you know, 00:02:14.300 --> 00:02:17.000 political appointments. Absolutely. Dr. Monterrez's 00:02:17.000 --> 00:02:19.120 legal challenge, it isn't just about her job. 00:02:19.240 --> 00:02:22.139 It feels like it's about setting crucial precedents. 00:02:22.259 --> 00:02:24.879 Who actually holds authority in these vital federal 00:02:24.879 --> 00:02:28.180 agencies and critically protecting scientific 00:02:28.180 --> 00:02:30.960 integrity? Exactly. And our sources reveal the 00:02:30.960 --> 00:02:33.219 Kennedy Senate confirmation process now looks 00:02:33.219 --> 00:02:36.689 like, well, Maybe a bit of a charade. How so? 00:02:37.030 --> 00:02:39.770 He told senators he had an open mind about vaccines. 00:02:40.370 --> 00:02:44.469 But since then, he's actively worked to, quote, 00:02:44.710 --> 00:02:47.370 rid the country of vaccines and fired numerous 00:02:47.370 --> 00:02:49.870 experts on the subject. So much for an open mind. 00:02:49.990 --> 00:02:52.509 Right. But Monterrez isn't going quietly. She's 00:02:52.509 --> 00:02:55.250 taking a defiant stance. She argues that as a 00:02:55.250 --> 00:02:57.409 Senate confirmed officer of the United States, 00:02:57.729 --> 00:03:00.030 she serves at the president's pleasure, not a 00:03:00.030 --> 00:03:02.509 cabinet secretary's, which would make her firing 00:03:02.509 --> 00:03:05.669 unlawful. Trump quickly backed Kennedy up. So 00:03:05.669 --> 00:03:08.129 this legal fight, it's almost certainly headed 00:03:08.129 --> 00:03:10.389 to the Supreme Court. A major showdown then. 00:03:10.569 --> 00:03:14.270 And get this in a move that's sure to get significant 00:03:14.270 --> 00:03:17.050 and probably skeptical attention from the medical 00:03:17.050 --> 00:03:19.150 community. Kennedy announced he'll reveal the 00:03:19.150 --> 00:03:22.069 cause of autism in September. Reveal the cause 00:03:22.069 --> 00:03:24.530 of autism in September. That's what the sources 00:03:24.530 --> 00:03:28.060 say. It's also worth noting, Monarez's role apparently 00:03:28.060 --> 00:03:30.439 had structural limitations from the start. She 00:03:30.439 --> 00:03:34.039 needed approval from both the CDC and HHS chief 00:03:34.039 --> 00:03:37.500 of staff for certain actions. That adds another 00:03:37.500 --> 00:03:40.340 layer. And what's particularly insightful here 00:03:40.340 --> 00:03:43.580 is who's representing Monarez. It's Abbie Lowell, 00:03:43.659 --> 00:03:45.639 the top lawyer. Right. He's actually started 00:03:45.639 --> 00:03:48.280 a firm specifically to defend individuals he 00:03:48.280 --> 00:03:50.659 believes Trump is unfairly targeting. Is that 00:03:50.659 --> 00:03:53.620 right? Who else is on his list? Well, high profile 00:03:53.620 --> 00:03:56.479 figures. Fed Governor Lisa Cook, New York AG 00:03:56.479 --> 00:04:00.219 Letitia James, Miles Taylor, Mark Zaid. Wow, 00:04:00.400 --> 00:04:02.800 quite a roster. Lowell is quoted saying his cases 00:04:02.800 --> 00:04:06.199 share a quote, central theme. The full power 00:04:06.199 --> 00:04:08.240 of the federal government being pointed in the 00:04:08.240 --> 00:04:10.680 direction of individual people who happen to 00:04:10.680 --> 00:04:12.840 be adverse to this administration's policies 00:04:12.840 --> 00:04:15.659 or who have criticized them. That's a strong 00:04:15.659 --> 00:04:18.709 claim. He emphasizes that, quote, no previous 00:04:18.709 --> 00:04:21.430 president has ever weaponized the entire federal 00:04:21.430 --> 00:04:25.209 government in order to destroy his critics. So 00:04:25.209 --> 00:04:27.769 this goes beyond just policy disagreements, doesn't 00:04:27.769 --> 00:04:30.110 it? It touches on fundamental questions about 00:04:30.110 --> 00:04:33.870 the rule of law, individual rights. OK, so moving 00:04:33.870 --> 00:04:37.550 from that internal friction. within federal agencies. 00:04:37.970 --> 00:04:41.269 Let's explore this fascinating shift, how blue 00:04:41.269 --> 00:04:43.910 states are now actively challenging federal authority. 00:04:44.189 --> 00:04:47.050 They're effectively turning the tables on the 00:04:47.050 --> 00:04:49.350 concept of federalism. Yeah, this is interesting. 00:04:49.629 --> 00:04:52.009 Historically, you know, red states championed 00:04:52.009 --> 00:04:54.550 federalism and states' rights. They used it to 00:04:54.550 --> 00:04:56.629 implement policies like abortion bans or to sort 00:04:56.629 --> 00:04:58.870 of sidestep federal gun law. Right, that was 00:04:58.870 --> 00:05:01.269 the playbook. But now blue states are adopting 00:05:01.269 --> 00:05:04.310 a strategy of non -cooperation, leveraging their 00:05:04.310 --> 00:05:06.860 own state infrastructure to push back. And this 00:05:06.860 --> 00:05:09.259 strategy, it really highlights the flexibility, 00:05:09.579 --> 00:05:11.500 maybe the potential for resistance that's kind 00:05:11.500 --> 00:05:14.160 of embedded in our federal system. The critical 00:05:14.160 --> 00:05:16.790 question here is... What happens when states 00:05:16.790 --> 00:05:20.170 adopt this strategy of like flooding the zone 00:05:20.170 --> 00:05:22.329 against the federal government? Right. What does 00:05:22.329 --> 00:05:24.769 happen? Well, lawsuits, Supreme Court rulings. 00:05:24.889 --> 00:05:27.129 Those are inevitable, of course. But the sources 00:05:27.129 --> 00:05:30.230 point out that police states could copy Texas's 00:05:30.230 --> 00:05:32.870 approach to abortion laws, you know, make small 00:05:32.870 --> 00:05:36.250 legislative tweaks, repass bills and force endless 00:05:36.250 --> 00:05:39.610 individual legal battles. Exactly. It's a tactic 00:05:39.610 --> 00:05:42.689 designed to just overwhelm the courts, make federal 00:05:42.689 --> 00:05:45.839 enforcement. basically impossible against a united 00:05:45.839 --> 00:05:48.300 front of what nearly half the country. Yeah. 00:05:48.339 --> 00:05:51.139 This isn't about one big dramatic confrontation. 00:05:51.540 --> 00:05:54.699 It's a sustained campaign of obstruction. The 00:05:54.699 --> 00:05:57.000 historical parallel they draw is really compelling. 00:05:57.600 --> 00:06:00.379 Free states back before the Civil War largely 00:06:00.379 --> 00:06:02.839 refused to enforce the Fugitive Slave Act. Right. 00:06:02.959 --> 00:06:04.819 They returned only about four enslaved people 00:06:04.819 --> 00:06:08.339 per year nationwide for decades. So non -cooperation 00:06:08.339 --> 00:06:11.720 can be incredibly effective. And today, blue 00:06:11.720 --> 00:06:13.819 states could use modern and non -cooperation 00:06:13.819 --> 00:06:16.139 in some really impactful ways. Think about the 00:06:16.139 --> 00:06:19.540 financial leverage. Major blue states, like California 00:06:19.540 --> 00:06:21.800 and New York, they're responsible for hundreds 00:06:21.800 --> 00:06:24.019 of billions in federal tax revenue. You delay 00:06:24.019 --> 00:06:26.800 payments indefinitely, just like personnel shortages. 00:06:27.480 --> 00:06:30.740 Plausible deniability. Or technical glitches. 00:06:31.060 --> 00:06:33.660 Or they could leverage their control over state 00:06:33.660 --> 00:06:36.339 -chartered banks, especially in financial hubs 00:06:36.339 --> 00:06:39.319 like New York, where systems like Swift and ACH 00:06:40.399 --> 00:06:42.639 process huge federal transactions. So what could 00:06:42.639 --> 00:06:45.560 they do there? impose enhanced security reviews 00:06:45.560 --> 00:06:48.360 on large federal transfers to slow everything 00:06:48.360 --> 00:06:52.300 down. Wow. And it goes beyond just finance. Operationally, 00:06:52.519 --> 00:06:55.060 federal agencies like the IRS, they rely heavily 00:06:55.060 --> 00:06:58.300 on state tax records, DMV data, banking systems. 00:06:58.860 --> 00:07:00.620 Yeah. States could implement new regulations, 00:07:01.279 --> 00:07:03.740 require manual review of, say, random federal 00:07:03.740 --> 00:07:06.879 data requests, severely hamper operations. So 00:07:06.879 --> 00:07:09.459 grind things to a halt. Pretty much. Furthermore, 00:07:09.779 --> 00:07:13.139 imagine a block of maybe 15 trifecta blue states 00:07:13.139 --> 00:07:16.399 where one party controls everything. They could 00:07:16.399 --> 00:07:19.839 demand, say, $200 billion from the feds for system 00:07:19.839 --> 00:07:22.939 upgrades just to ensure compatibility, essentially 00:07:22.939 --> 00:07:25.600 holding federal functions hostage. And on top 00:07:25.600 --> 00:07:27.560 of that, they could actively lure professionals 00:07:27.560 --> 00:07:29.980 away from red states, maybe stop recognizing 00:07:29.980 --> 00:07:32.259 red state medical licenses or medical school 00:07:32.259 --> 00:07:34.459 grads for residencies. A brain drain strategy. 00:07:35.060 --> 00:07:38.149 Exactly. while offering incentives, fast -track 00:07:38.149 --> 00:07:40.930 licensing for doctors, nurses, teachers, to move 00:07:40.930 --> 00:07:43.129 from red states to blue states. It's a powerful 00:07:43.129 --> 00:07:46.509 kind of inventive strategy. Could create a huge 00:07:46.509 --> 00:07:49.629 brain drain. Definitely a new dimension to federal 00:07:49.629 --> 00:07:51.790 -state conflict. All right, let's pivot now to 00:07:51.790 --> 00:07:55.089 the economy, because this next development is... 00:07:55.079 --> 00:07:58.420 quite striking. We're seeing some really unconventional 00:07:58.420 --> 00:08:00.600 moves, things that are making even, you know, 00:08:00.759 --> 00:08:02.519 seasoned conservatives scratch their heads. OK, 00:08:02.639 --> 00:08:04.240 I'm intrigued. Think about the government becoming 00:08:04.240 --> 00:08:07.560 a major shareholder in a tech giant. Like owning 00:08:07.560 --> 00:08:11.459 stock. Exactly. The sources reveal Trump effectively 00:08:11.459 --> 00:08:14.519 forced Intel to sell 10 percent of its shares 00:08:14.519 --> 00:08:16.639 to the U .S. government. Ten percent. making 00:08:16.639 --> 00:08:18.579 the government. The largest single shareholder. 00:08:18.680 --> 00:08:20.779 Yep. And they got a bargain. Paid below market 00:08:20.779 --> 00:08:24.459 price $20 .47 per share versus Intel's market 00:08:24.459 --> 00:08:28.660 price of $24 .80. Wow. That's quite a move. And 00:08:28.660 --> 00:08:30.500 this domestic intervention, it sort of opens 00:08:30.500 --> 00:08:32.559 up a broader discussion, doesn't it, about international 00:08:32.559 --> 00:08:35.139 economic policy too. Well, the question it raises 00:08:35.139 --> 00:08:37.259 is, what are the implications for the global 00:08:37.259 --> 00:08:41.220 economy when a major player uses economic leverage 00:08:41.220 --> 00:08:44.419 in such a direct kind of coercive way, both at 00:08:44.419 --> 00:08:47.700 home and on the world stage? Right. And the immediate 00:08:47.700 --> 00:08:50.980 backlash, domestically at least, from libertarians 00:08:50.980 --> 00:08:54.340 and conservatives, was swift. Scott Linsacombe 00:08:54.340 --> 00:08:56.120 from the Cato Institute, for example, called 00:08:56.120 --> 00:08:58.990 it a very bad idea. Not surprising. Coming from 00:08:58.990 --> 00:09:01.649 Cato, what were his main points? Well, his critique 00:09:01.649 --> 00:09:05.009 boils down to a few key areas. He sees big risks 00:09:05.009 --> 00:09:09.049 to investor confidence, legal stability. Mm -hmm. 00:09:09.370 --> 00:09:11.450 Lawsuits, probably. Definitely. Yeah. Potential 00:09:11.450 --> 00:09:13.830 for political interference in core business decisions, 00:09:14.250 --> 00:09:16.429 like who gets hired, where factories are located. 00:09:16.570 --> 00:09:19.110 Yeah. Imagine pressure to keep a factory open 00:09:19.110 --> 00:09:21.350 in a politically favored state, even if it makes 00:09:21.350 --> 00:09:23.990 no economic sense. Exactly. Or even if you can't 00:09:23.990 --> 00:09:26.940 attract. talent there, maybe because of state 00:09:26.940 --> 00:09:30.039 laws like abortion bans. Right. And he sees a 00:09:30.039 --> 00:09:32.919 fundamental threat to market dynamism, stifling 00:09:32.919 --> 00:09:35.379 R &D innovation. If the government starts treating 00:09:35.379 --> 00:09:38.559 the company like a cash cow. Precisely. Forcing 00:09:38.559 --> 00:09:41.360 unsustainable dividends, hurting long term investment, 00:09:41.980 --> 00:09:44.059 slowing down decision making because you need 00:09:44.059 --> 00:09:47.580 presidential approval, biasing government contracts 00:09:47.580 --> 00:09:49.899 towards companies using Intel products. It distorts 00:09:49.899 --> 00:09:52.669 everything. A long list of potential downsides. 00:09:53.029 --> 00:09:54.730 And Lindsey Coombe also warned about the precedent. 00:09:55.289 --> 00:09:58.549 If this goes unchecked, what stops future administrations 00:09:58.549 --> 00:10:02.330 dictating terms to, say, GM about electric car 00:10:02.330 --> 00:10:04.970 production, creating policy whiplash that could 00:10:04.970 --> 00:10:07.970 make companies totally unviable? That's a serious 00:10:07.970 --> 00:10:11.029 concern. Was he the only one? Oh, no. Critics 00:10:11.029 --> 00:10:13.649 across the conservative spectrum chimed in. Senators 00:10:13.649 --> 00:10:17.330 Tom Tillis, Rand Paul, former VP Mike Pence, 00:10:17.669 --> 00:10:20.799 even Trump's own guy Larry Kudlow was very, very 00:10:20.799 --> 00:10:23.480 uncomfortable. So broad pushback from the right. 00:10:23.740 --> 00:10:25.580 Yeah, they called it everything from a step toward 00:10:25.580 --> 00:10:29.139 socialism to a state -owned enterprise a la CCCP. 00:10:29.480 --> 00:10:31.860 Senator Todd Young, who is key in the Cheap Pias 00:10:31.860 --> 00:10:34.240 Act, even clarified the law was never meant for 00:10:34.240 --> 00:10:36.120 this kind of direct government equity stake. 00:10:36.379 --> 00:10:38.080 Interesting. And the sources mentioned future 00:10:38.080 --> 00:10:40.320 worries, too. Trump reportedly thinking about 00:10:40.320 --> 00:10:43.139 an equity stake in Lockheed Martin. Lockheed. 00:10:43.159 --> 00:10:45.320 But almost all their revenue comes from the government 00:10:45.320 --> 00:10:48.200 anyway. Exactly. Ninety seven percent raises 00:10:48.200 --> 00:10:50.820 the specter of a monopoly. stifled innovation 00:10:50.820 --> 00:10:53.820 if Trump favors his company over competitors 00:10:53.820 --> 00:10:57.299 like Boeing. Yikes. And that domestic intervention, 00:10:57.299 --> 00:10:59.639 as I mentioned, it kind of echoes a similar approach 00:10:59.639 --> 00:11:02.220 in Trump's international energy strategy. OK. 00:11:02.240 --> 00:11:04.480 Connect those dots for us. Well, the reported 00:11:04.480 --> 00:11:07.500 aim is to coerce other countries, force them 00:11:07.500 --> 00:11:10.139 to abandon clean energy projects and instead 00:11:10.139 --> 00:11:13.240 buy US oil, gas, and coal. Even though renewables 00:11:13.240 --> 00:11:15.100 are getting cheaper here. Right. Even though 00:11:15.100 --> 00:11:18.279 the US is arguably fighting a losing battle domestically, 00:11:18.679 --> 00:11:20.779 where renewables are becoming increasingly competitive 00:11:20.779 --> 00:11:23.740 just on economics. So what's the tactic internationally? 00:11:23.929 --> 00:11:27.070 Blackmail, basically. Threatening tariffs. Seriously. 00:11:27.269 --> 00:11:30.090 Other examples? Oh, yes. The EU apparently agreed 00:11:30.090 --> 00:11:33.570 to buy $750 billion in U .S. oil and gas over 00:11:33.570 --> 00:11:35.710 three years just to get tariffs on their products 00:11:35.710 --> 00:11:40.570 set at only 15%. $750 billion. That's huge. South 00:11:40.570 --> 00:11:43.789 Korea agreed to $100 billion in U .S. liquefied 00:11:43.789 --> 00:11:47.830 gas. Japan agreed to invest $550 billion in U 00:11:47.830 --> 00:11:50.309 .S. energy infrastructure, partly to ship Alaskan 00:11:50.309 --> 00:11:53.899 oil and gas to Asia. Wow. But can the US even 00:11:53.899 --> 00:11:56.419 deliver all that? Well, that's the potential 00:11:56.419 --> 00:11:59.200 bright light mentioned in the sources. The US 00:11:59.200 --> 00:12:01.940 currently lacks the capacity to export this much 00:12:01.940 --> 00:12:03.980 energy. Building the infrastructure needed will 00:12:03.980 --> 00:12:06.419 take years. So maybe some of these promises are 00:12:06.419 --> 00:12:09.820 just smoke? Could be. More smoke than substance, 00:12:10.019 --> 00:12:13.149 perhaps. But the sources also note Many countries 00:12:13.149 --> 00:12:16.549 will likely really resent the U .S. for meddling 00:12:16.549 --> 00:12:19.470 in their domestic energy policies. Trump reportedly 00:12:19.470 --> 00:12:21.470 couldn't care less about those sentiments. It's 00:12:21.470 --> 00:12:24.490 definitely a bold, maybe aggressive use of economic 00:12:24.490 --> 00:12:27.330 power globally. OK, so speaking of power plays, 00:12:27.490 --> 00:12:31.049 let's shift focus now. From global economics 00:12:31.049 --> 00:12:34.950 to the fascinating, maybe precarious, internal 00:12:34.950 --> 00:12:37.409 structures of our political parties. First, the 00:12:37.409 --> 00:12:40.029 Republican Party. According to one source, it's 00:12:40.029 --> 00:12:42.730 somehow managed to fly with six wings. Six wings. 00:12:42.870 --> 00:12:45.470 That sounds unstable. Right. And the only reason 00:12:45.470 --> 00:12:48.029 it hasn't crashed and burned, the sources suggest, 00:12:48.350 --> 00:12:50.669 is the gravitational force of Donald Trump holding 00:12:50.669 --> 00:12:53.029 all these pieces together. And that internal 00:12:53.029 --> 00:12:55.850 dynamic, these wings, it raises a crucial question, 00:12:55.889 --> 00:12:59.210 doesn't it? How does this cohesion or lack thereof 00:12:59.210 --> 00:13:02.289 play out in election cycles? Doug Sosnick, former 00:13:02.289 --> 00:13:05.090 Clinton advisor, has a particularly insightful 00:13:05.090 --> 00:13:07.129 take on this. OK, let's break down those six 00:13:07.129 --> 00:13:10.070 wings first. The sources list them out. You've 00:13:10.070 --> 00:13:12.429 got the Mejia populists. Right, the working class 00:13:12.429 --> 00:13:15.419 base. Anti -immigration, anti -foreign wars, 00:13:15.580 --> 00:13:17.580 pro -tariffs. The more traditional free market 00:13:17.580 --> 00:13:19.899 Republicans. Lower taxes, smaller government, 00:13:20.139 --> 00:13:22.059 free trade focus. The establishment wing, maybe. 00:13:22.340 --> 00:13:24.799 Think Youngkin, Kemp, Thune. Then the fiscal 00:13:24.799 --> 00:13:27.659 hawks, kind of remnants of the Tea Party, focused 00:13:27.659 --> 00:13:31.700 on budget deficits. Cruz, Paul, DeSantis fit 00:13:31.700 --> 00:13:34.600 here. The religious right. Obviously crucial. 00:13:34.980 --> 00:13:37.000 Won over by Trump because he delivered on judges, 00:13:37.179 --> 00:13:40.059 abortion, anti -LGBTQ views, despite his personal 00:13:40.059 --> 00:13:42.700 conduct. Johnson, Lankford. Right. A transactional 00:13:42.700 --> 00:13:44.860 relationship, perhaps? Then this emerging tech. 00:13:44.879 --> 00:13:48.679 Right. Focus on AI, crypto, free speech online, 00:13:49.139 --> 00:13:51.860 Musk, Andreessen, Sachs. They often favor skilled 00:13:51.860 --> 00:13:53.799 immigrants to keep salaries down. An interesting 00:13:53.799 --> 00:13:57.519 new faction. And finally, the MAHA make America 00:13:57.519 --> 00:14:01.190 hateful again and former Democrats wing. Conservative 00:14:01.190 --> 00:14:03.950 Dems who felt the party went too woke. Robert 00:14:03.950 --> 00:14:07.350 Kennedy Jr. is seen as a leader here. Anti -Big 00:14:07.350 --> 00:14:10.789 Ag is another theme. Wow, that's a diverse coalition, 00:14:11.009 --> 00:14:13.929 often antagonistic, you'd think. Totally. Reminiscent 00:14:13.929 --> 00:14:18.129 of FDR's 1932 Democratic coalition, lots of different 00:14:18.129 --> 00:14:20.850 conflicting factions held together by his genius. 00:14:21.610 --> 00:14:24.000 But it eventually fractured. So the big question 00:14:24.000 --> 00:14:27.120 is what happens to the GOP post -Trump? Exactly. 00:14:27.419 --> 00:14:29.799 And what's noteworthy here, going back to Sosnik, 00:14:30.120 --> 00:14:32.620 are his key observations about modern voting 00:14:32.620 --> 00:14:34.940 patterns. Okay, what does he see? He says the 00:14:34.940 --> 00:14:37.100 single most important factor determining how 00:14:37.100 --> 00:14:39.500 people vote these days is educational level. 00:14:39.700 --> 00:14:42.529 Really? More than income or race? Apparently 00:14:42.529 --> 00:14:45.129 so, according to his analysis. He also distinguishes 00:14:45.129 --> 00:14:48.190 between two types of politicians. Party regulars, 00:14:48.389 --> 00:14:50.990 their votes mostly transfer to other party candidates. 00:14:51.529 --> 00:14:54.029 And movement leaders like Trump or Bernie Sanders, 00:14:54.169 --> 00:14:56.169 whose votes are much more personal, they don't 00:14:56.169 --> 00:14:58.750 necessarily transfer down the ballot. Ah, okay. 00:14:58.990 --> 00:15:01.259 And that difference matters for. It has huge 00:15:01.259 --> 00:15:03.820 implications for 2026, the midterms. Well, so. 00:15:04.039 --> 00:15:06.519 Sosnik suggests Trump's core Trumpist supporters. 00:15:06.759 --> 00:15:08.460 They aren't necessarily traditional Republicans. 00:15:09.039 --> 00:15:10.779 They might not turn out for House candidates 00:15:10.779 --> 00:15:13.460 in 2026 if Trump himself isn't on the ballot. 00:15:13.580 --> 00:15:15.279 Right, because midterm turnout is always lower 00:15:15.279 --> 00:15:18.559 anyway. Exactly. And historically, who turned 00:15:18.559 --> 00:15:22.299 out reliably in midterms? College educated Republicans. 00:15:22.440 --> 00:15:25.919 I know. Now, most college educated voters lean 00:15:25.919 --> 00:15:28.379 Democrat. And they're angry they're expected 00:15:28.379 --> 00:15:31.740 to turn out in force in 2026. That's a huge demographic 00:15:31.740 --> 00:15:33.820 shift. It really is. Sosnick points out back 00:15:33.820 --> 00:15:36.620 in 96, less educated states were largely blue. 00:15:37.120 --> 00:15:39.840 By 2000, that flipped, partly because Al Gore 00:15:39.840 --> 00:15:42.139 was seen as, you know, a snobby intellectual 00:15:42.139 --> 00:15:44.460 turning off Joe Sixpack. Right. I remember that 00:15:44.460 --> 00:15:46.799 narrative. So Sosnick argues that process is 00:15:46.799 --> 00:15:49.840 now essentially complete. Highly educated states 00:15:49.840 --> 00:15:53.220 are mostly blue. Less educated states trend red. 00:15:53.440 --> 00:15:57.200 So his prediction for 2026. An unfavorable electorate 00:15:57.200 --> 00:16:00.159 for the GOP bodes well for Democrats, he thinks. 00:16:00.419 --> 00:16:03.659 But what about 2028 presidential year? Different 00:16:03.659 --> 00:16:06.299 dynamics. Sosnik highlights big challenges for 00:16:06.299 --> 00:16:08.620 Democrats then. They need an inspirational candidate, 00:16:08.860 --> 00:16:10.879 not just an anti -Trump figure. They need to 00:16:10.879 --> 00:16:13.700 navigate social issues carefully, where some 00:16:13.700 --> 00:16:16.419 stances might be outside the mainstream for the 00:16:16.419 --> 00:16:19.320 broader electorate. And crucially, They need 00:16:19.320 --> 00:16:22.039 a compelling agenda for non -college voters. 00:16:22.340 --> 00:16:25.399 That's still 60 % of the electorate. So just 00:16:25.399 --> 00:16:28.720 not being Donald Trump isn't a winning strategy 00:16:28.720 --> 00:16:31.639 long term? Not enough for 2028, according to 00:16:31.639 --> 00:16:34.519 Sosnik. They need a proactive vision for those 00:16:34.519 --> 00:16:38.039 working class, non -college voters to avoid losing 00:16:38.039 --> 00:16:40.139 them completely. Okay, speaking of the electorate, 00:16:40.279 --> 00:16:42.019 let's talk about the people in Congress for a 00:16:42.019 --> 00:16:44.990 second. There's this... geriatric problem brewing, 00:16:45.309 --> 00:16:47.470 particularly for one party. Ah, yeah, the age 00:16:47.470 --> 00:16:50.190 factor. It seems many elderly Democrats, say 00:16:50.190 --> 00:16:53.750 75 and older, are refusing to retire. Even though 00:16:53.750 --> 00:16:55.830 the base is calling for young blood. And the 00:16:55.830 --> 00:16:57.870 Republicans. They're apparently not pressuring 00:16:57.870 --> 00:17:00.610 their oldsters to leave, maybe because it would 00:17:00.610 --> 00:17:03.509 imply their own oldster in chief is past his 00:17:03.509 --> 00:17:05.849 prime. Interesting dynamic. So you see long serving 00:17:05.849 --> 00:17:09.289 members running again. Maxine Waters, 87. Stanie 00:17:09.289 --> 00:17:12.970 Hoyer, 86. Jim Clyburn, 85, apparently motivated 00:17:12.970 --> 00:17:16.410 by his kids here, 56 and 63. Rosa DeLauro, 82. 00:17:16.809 --> 00:17:20.069 Bonnie Watson Coleman, 80. Lois Frankel, 77, 00:17:20.150 --> 00:17:21.950 who's sort of implied younger generations are 00:17:21.950 --> 00:17:24.930 clueless. Wow, that's quite a list of incumbents 00:17:24.930 --> 00:17:26.829 holding on. The stats are striking. 50 members 00:17:26.829 --> 00:17:30.369 75 or older are up in 2026. Nearly 70 % of them 00:17:30.369 --> 00:17:32.769 are running again, and 70 % of those are Democrats. 00:17:33.170 --> 00:17:35.029 So it's more pronounced on the Democratic side. 00:17:35.049 --> 00:17:37.670 Definitely. And... So bring statistic. Three 00:17:37.670 --> 00:17:40.630 House Democrats, Sylvester Turner, 70, Jerry 00:17:40.630 --> 00:17:44.230 Connolly, 75, Raul Grijalva, 77, have tragically 00:17:44.230 --> 00:17:47.289 died in office just in 2025. It almost seems 00:17:47.289 --> 00:17:49.109 like dying in the saddle is a Democratic goal 00:17:49.109 --> 00:17:51.670 for some, as one source put it, maybe a bit cynically. 00:17:51.750 --> 00:17:53.769 And there's clearly a disconnect with the base. 00:17:54.529 --> 00:17:57.390 DNC Vice Chair David Hogg started a packy to 00:17:57.390 --> 00:17:59.809 primary older Democrats. Oh, we heard about that. 00:17:59.829 --> 00:18:02.210 He got shut down by DNC Chair Ken Martin, shows 00:18:02.210 --> 00:18:04.029 a real struggle between the party establishment 00:18:04.029 --> 00:18:07.500 and its younger activists. Right. And this situation 00:18:07.500 --> 00:18:10.240 with congressional age, plus the national electoral 00:18:10.240 --> 00:18:12.720 dynamics we discussed, it really makes state 00:18:12.720 --> 00:18:14.700 -level races even more critical, doesn't it? 00:18:14.720 --> 00:18:18.140 I hope so. It leads us to our final area of electoral 00:18:18.140 --> 00:18:22.210 focus. state attorney general elections. Often 00:18:22.210 --> 00:18:25.789 overlooked, but hugely important. Why AGs specifically? 00:18:25.970 --> 00:18:28.309 Well, they're the state's top cops, right? Yeah. 00:18:28.410 --> 00:18:31.509 Handling criminal civil cases. But critically, 00:18:31.789 --> 00:18:34.410 they're the ones who often sue federal administrations 00:18:34.410 --> 00:18:36.950 from the opposing party. The legal challenges 00:18:36.950 --> 00:18:38.869 we talked about earlier. Exactly. They're arguably 00:18:38.869 --> 00:18:41.430 the most important state officials after governors 00:18:41.430 --> 00:18:44.250 in terms of national impact. OK. So what's the 00:18:44.250 --> 00:18:46.950 landscape there? There are 31 AG elections this 00:18:46.950 --> 00:18:50.529 cycle. Right now it's 24 Republicans, 19 Democrats 00:18:50.529 --> 00:18:53.390 out of the 43 elected AGs. And the battlegrounds. 00:18:53.390 --> 00:18:56.369 Here's what's striking. All five races considered 00:18:56.369 --> 00:18:59.690 toss ups. Arizona, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, 00:18:59.789 --> 00:19:02.230 Wisconsin are currently held by Democrats. All 00:19:02.230 --> 00:19:04.890 five. So those are all potential Republican pickups. 00:19:05.269 --> 00:19:07.410 Significant potential, yes. For example, Chris 00:19:07.410 --> 00:19:09.670 May is the Democrat in Arizona. She won by only 00:19:09.670 --> 00:19:14.079 280 votes in 2022. That's razor thin. Joff Call, 00:19:14.359 --> 00:19:16.599 the Dem in Wisconsin, might run for governor. 00:19:16.880 --> 00:19:18.940 That could leave an open seat in a state that's 00:19:18.940 --> 00:19:21.839 already fiercely contested. So it looks tough 00:19:21.839 --> 00:19:24.960 for Democrats to hold those seats, let alone 00:19:24.960 --> 00:19:27.980 pick up new ones. It highlights a distinct lack 00:19:27.980 --> 00:19:30.740 of, you know, low -hanging fruit for Democrats 00:19:30.740 --> 00:19:33.440 in these AG races this cycle. Maybe Virginia 00:19:33.440 --> 00:19:37.839 in 2025, Georgia in 2026 offer slight possibilities, 00:19:37.920 --> 00:19:41.099 but they might need a strong Black gubernatorial 00:19:41.099 --> 00:19:43.420 candidate to really boost turnout there. OK, 00:19:43.559 --> 00:19:46.319 got it. And just quickly, to round out the electoral 00:19:46.319 --> 00:19:48.799 picture, we also looked at the closest house 00:19:48.799 --> 00:19:51.170 districts. the ones that can really swing the 00:19:51.170 --> 00:19:54.049 national balance of power. The bellwethers. Election 00:19:54.049 --> 00:19:56.630 analyst Nathan Gonzalez has this method for measuring 00:19:56.630 --> 00:19:58.849 district closeness, combines federal and state 00:19:58.849 --> 00:20:01.369 results over four cycles. OK. His list of the 00:20:01.369 --> 00:20:04.029 10 closest districts before any new redistricting, 00:20:04.309 --> 00:20:06.049 obviously, they're all within one percentage 00:20:06.049 --> 00:20:08.210 point. Clear toss ups. And the split. Currently 00:20:08.210 --> 00:20:10.549 five held by Democrats, five by Republicans. 00:20:11.089 --> 00:20:13.450 Perfectly balanced. But very sensitive to national 00:20:13.450 --> 00:20:16.789 tides. Exactly. History shows these districts 00:20:16.789 --> 00:20:20.099 rarely move independently. National trends affect 00:20:20.099 --> 00:20:23.119 most of them. A mere two point national popular 00:20:23.119 --> 00:20:25.799 vote advantage for one party could potentially 00:20:25.799 --> 00:20:28.619 swing all 10. That's incredible leverage. Where 00:20:28.619 --> 00:20:31.279 do things stand now? Well, the most recent generic 00:20:31.279 --> 00:20:33.640 House poll shows Democrats ahead by eight points. 00:20:34.240 --> 00:20:36.819 But, you know, as we always say, a week is a 00:20:36.819 --> 00:20:39.579 long time in politics. And of course, gerrymandering 00:20:39.579 --> 00:20:42.019 could still redraw districts and change the whole 00:20:42.019 --> 00:20:45.220 landscape before 2026. Always a factor. So pulling 00:20:45.220 --> 00:20:48.490 it all together. What's truly striking is how 00:20:48.490 --> 00:20:51.930 these seemingly disparate threads all converge. 00:20:52.430 --> 00:20:55.289 The challenges to federal power, both from within, 00:20:55.369 --> 00:20:57.930 like the CDC issue, and from without, like the 00:20:57.930 --> 00:21:01.089 blue state strategy. The government's expanding 00:21:01.089 --> 00:21:03.630 and kind of controversial role in the economy, 00:21:03.809 --> 00:21:05.829 both domestically with Intel and internationally 00:21:05.829 --> 00:21:09.349 with energy. And these profound internal shifts 00:21:09.349 --> 00:21:11.230 within the political parties, the six wings of 00:21:11.230 --> 00:21:13.490 the GOP, the Democrats' demographic challenges, 00:21:13.730 --> 00:21:16.730 they all point to a period of really significant 00:21:16.730 --> 00:21:19.410 redefinition redefinition of what exactly of 00:21:19.410 --> 00:21:21.529 power really it's clear the traditional lines 00:21:21.529 --> 00:21:24.430 of authority and influence are being tested redrawn 00:21:24.430 --> 00:21:27.269 across multiple fronts it feels like it's fundamentally 00:21:27.269 --> 00:21:30.769 altering how our system operates so what does 00:21:30.769 --> 00:21:33.829 this all mean for you the listener and well for 00:21:33.829 --> 00:21:37.380 the future We've seen this aggressive government 00:21:37.380 --> 00:21:40.200 intervention in health, in corporations, in global 00:21:40.200 --> 00:21:43.180 energy. We've seen states push back against the 00:21:43.180 --> 00:21:46.380 feds in really novel, powerful ways. And we've 00:21:46.380 --> 00:21:48.819 seen political parties grappling with their own 00:21:48.819 --> 00:21:51.579 identities, facing these huge existential questions 00:21:51.579 --> 00:21:54.519 about leadership, about voter appeal. It really 00:21:54.519 --> 00:21:56.140 leaves you wondering, isn't it, what happens 00:21:56.140 --> 00:21:58.559 when the very foundations of how power is supposed 00:21:58.559 --> 00:22:01.920 to work checks and balances federalism, the government's 00:22:01.920 --> 00:22:04.390 role in the economy? What happens when those 00:22:04.390 --> 00:22:07.009 aren't just challenged but actively redefined? 00:22:07.190 --> 00:22:10.710 It's a profound question. How will these, I mean, 00:22:11.450 --> 00:22:14.170 really seismic shifts shape not just the next 00:22:14.170 --> 00:22:16.609 election cycle but the very fabric of our society 00:22:16.609 --> 00:22:17.890 for decades to come?