Hello everybody and welcome to the second episode of the Left of Old North podcast.
My name is Adrian and my co-host, DJ.
And today, just got a couple things to talk about right off the top.
Last time, audio was pretty terrible.
We just had to get up and go and start the podcast.
There's a technical issue, it is what it is.
And I have to make a preemptive apology today because I am sick as a dog.
But hey, it wouldn't be the holidays if I didn't end up feeling like crap one way or
another.
But Merry Christmas to everybody who celebrates Happy Hanukkah and Happy Holidays to everyone
considering that it is the end of the year.
That means that the elections that just took place are now going to have the outcome that
I guess the voters wanted.
January 1st, 2025 is when the statewide offices and the House and Senate and the judicial
positions are going to be sworn in here in North Carolina.
And we're going to talk about some of those incoming people because there's some new
faces, there's some familiar faces, but in different positions.
And there's definitely some unwanted changes, but also some welcome ones.
So let's just get into it.
CJ wanted to ask you right at the top, who were you most excited to see on the ticket
and now coming into office this year?
So maybe I'm a little bit biased about this one.
But one I'm really excited about is Rodney Pierce up in North Carolina House District
27.
So Warren, North Hampton, Halifax County.
And like I said, I'm a little bit biased, but that's because I was his campaign manager
earlier this year.
So, you know, but yeah, yeah.
I would talk about that because like there, that was one of the ones that was one of these
primary elections that was hugely influential in how the state, like how the Democratic
Party makeup is going to be.
Oh yeah.
So a little bit of context like Adrian just said, this was the primary race.
So he was going up against a guy by the name of Michael Ray, who had been in there for
20 years at this point, Democrat, but voted with Republicans.
Even on the term, it was usually between about 85, sometimes 95% of the time.
So very much those Democrat name only kind of vibes.
And it was important to get him out.
And you know, we kind of talked a little bit about Cecil Brockman and how he had a primary
challenge.
This was a very similar type of situation.
And so we managed to pull off a little bit of a miracle there and we won.
And because Republicans knew they could count on a great vote a lot of the time or they
didn't put up a general election opponent.
So once we won the primary, that was it.
You know, Ronnie was going to the state house.
Yeah.
Do you think that it, even if they had put up a general election opponent, do you think
he, that they would have won?
I don't think so.
I think it would have been a lot tougher or I think it would have been a tough race for
the Republican just because of the Democratic makeup of the area.
But yeah.
And to be clear, to be clear to anybody listening, this house district is a pretty safe Democratic
area.
But again, this is also in Eastern North Carolina.
So it's a little different.
Exactly.
And when I said I still, I think it just says a lot in general though that they weren't
even going to bother putting up a Republican camp.
Yeah.
And it's pretty, it's pretty nice to see.
Like what was the margin of, what was the margin of your victory?
Oh, let me, let me just look it up right here because I cannot remember the exact number,
but it was very, very close.
Yeah.
It was like skin of your teeth kind of win.
Like, yeah.
Where is it?
Let's see.
I'm on the board of the lessons website.
Oddly enough, kind of like Seussel Brockman.
Yeah.
We, we won ultimately by 34 votes.
Yeah.
That was 0.28%.
And there's, there's how many precincts in that in that district?
46.
Okay.
So literally less, it was the difference of less than one person per precinct.
Yeah.
That's incredible.
Yeah.
I, that night we had gone to a watch party and I, you know, everyone's having a good
time, having stuff on the back for the work that they were doing.
Does that really so?
Sure.
And I'm just that weird guy over there in the corner on the laptop just refreshing
just like every five seconds.
Something new would pop up.
Obsessing over all the little maps, all the little precincts, all that stuff, just hoping
that we could, you know.
Yeah.
You're huddled over in the corner with your laptop, just hitting F5 over and over and
over again.
Exactly.
And I, I do not remember what time the results came in.
It may have been like 10, 11 ish.
Yeah.
I remember the final time I pressed that refresh button and saw, you know, all the precincts
reported and I saw that we were ahead.
Well, I tell you that room absolutely erupted.
I think like me and Rodney, we were like jumping up and down and everything just celebrating.
I like it, it felt like, you know, it felt like something you'd see in a movie or like,
you know, an episode of the West Wing or something.
And that, that, the joy that filled that room was incredible.
Yeah.
Aaron Sorkin, eat your heart out.
This is the real world.
And what's funny about that and about many of these other races that we're going to
talk about today is that people, like people who are not fully, like, tapped in to the
political landscape of North Carolina would see that result and just go, oh, okay.
It's a, it's, it's a, it's still a Democrat.
It's going to be same old, same old.
It's like, as we talked about last week, there are always going to be characters in different
positions of power.
And this is no different.
Rodney is a very different, is going to operate very differently from Michael Ray.
I can just, just in my brief conversation with him during the course of the campaign
that I ran, I can already tell you that that's going to be the case.
But if you don't believe me, go and listen to the interview that he did with, I believe
it was under the dome.
And that, that's another North Carolina politics podcast that with, it's not WU NC, is it?
No, News and Observer.
They have a good podcast.
Obviously, it's not going to be as good as ours, but because they, they have to skirt
around a bunch of different issues, but maybe I shouldn't say that.
But, but, they're good for what they have to do.
They are.
I think maybe we should do like a list of, we've already getting a book list started.
Maybe we just need to like, hey, we'll shout out some of these lesser known podcasts.
Yeah.
We're giving back to the community anyway.
So, all right.
So let's go ahead and start with the lower chamber.
The House of Representatives, the North Carolina House of Representatives of the General Assembly.
There were a bunch of Democrats that ran and lost.
There were a bunch of Republicans that ran and lost, thankfully.
And some of the retiring incumbents ran for state Senate or treasurer or the U.S. House.
We're going to bring up some of the more interesting ones, some of the people that are coming in
that you definitely might still want to pay attention to.
We already mentioned Michael Ray, who lost in District 27 to Rodney Pierce.
And then there are two Republicans that lost in their primary elections.
Kevin Crutchfield lost to Brian Etchivaria.
I think I'm saying that right in District 82.
And George Cleveland lost renomination to Wyatt Gable in District 14.
So you're not going to see those names anymore.
Probably won't see them ever again, but we'll give them two years to figure it out.
And as for the retirees, there were a few, of course, that were running instead for like
state treasurer like Wesley Harris, who ran in District 103.
Unfortunately, he did not win against Brad Briner.
And in District 107, Kelly Alexander initially announced his retirement, but then ended up
dying on September 6th earlier this year.
And then Bobby Drakeford was nominated to succeed him.
And this was a long time progressive representative, representative Alexander.
This was the guy who would push for the legalization of marijuana every single session.
That was his flagship.
He was considered a statesman, icon, civil rights leader, and just real, real sad that
he was gone.
But I mean, he did the work that he did up until the very end.
And then Kayla Brutale, who retired to run for US House, did not end up winning that
election.
I think it was not very close.
If I remember correctly, that sounds right.
That's one 8% to 43.2%.
Okay.
So it was not very close.
And then one that we wanted to talk about a certain retiree that is really just a retiree
and name only Tim Moore, quote unquote retired from his seat in District 111.
Tim Moore, again, we mentioned him in the last episode, he was the Speaker of the House
for the generals or for the North Carolina House of Representatives.
He retired to run for the US House District 14.
And if that number sounds familiar to you, it should because that was originally TikTok
superstar Jeff Jackson's House District.
This was a little spit of land that Moore and the rest of the legislature cut Jeff
Jackson out of.
They sliced and diced it up very nicely so that it would be perfect for Tim Moore to
run for it in the future.
And while I cannot substantiate that he himself specifically managed and made that happen,
it is awfully coincidental that that was that that little seat was just there waiting for
him.
And now he's going to the US House.
Yeah.
No, rather, it's rather convenient, so let's say it is convenient.
It's it's it's almost like there was some kind of intervention there to make it happen.
And of course, we know that there was a bit of a turnaround there, though, with Jeff Jackson,
he was able to pick himself up by his bootstraps and run for Attorney General instead.
And one against former US House Representative Dan Bishop, who if you remember his name,
you should because he was, I wouldn't say solely responsible, but highly influential
in getting the bathroom ban bill passed here in the state.
Yeah.
And this if and regardless of the culture or stuff, this was a bill that caused a massive
economic struggle in the state.
So I will say so that was what 25th?
No, 2016.
2016.
Yeah.
So that was like right when I was starting to get involved with politics and starting
to pay attention.
I remember just hearing so much about all these like musicians and different people,
different things that were refused into coming to North Carolina out of protest because of
that bill.
I'm someone to the math.
Yeah, it was billions of dollars.
It was an insane amount of money that was lost.
And that's what I mean, that this this caused in the economic downstream, this was maybe
not catastrophic, but it was a huge blow to North Carolina, not just on the national scale,
but economically as well.
Yeah.
And let's see.
So this was an article I'm seeing from March 27 2017, right?
Mm hmm.
If we were projected to lose $4 billion.
Wow.
Because of that bill.
$4 billion just to keep keep keep in mind that just this last year, the government, the
local government touted that we had a surplus of a billion dollars and that was a huge deal.
So times that by four and then subtract that from any kind of surplus that you would run
in the government of North Carolina.
And like this is this is how devastating that that is.
And also to keep keep all of that in mind, we just got federal approval for $9 billion
in hurricane relief funds.
And this is actually something we posted about on Blue Sky.
Go ahead and follow us on Blue Sky.
If you haven't already, please do that.
And also you can follow on our hot takes and posts that I tweet about or excuse me, that
what what what do you call it on Blue Sky that you post about, I guess?
I'm just calling it post because some of the suggested names just sound so ridiculous.
Yeah.
Boy, they really shot themselves in the foot with that whole ex rebrand because tweet was
such a universal term, you know?
It's like everybody knew that it wouldn't when you're talking about a tweet.
Okay, you're talking about it's it's on Twitter.
Just man.
Anyway, with this episode, just talking about Elon Musk.
So we won't go there today, but keep in mind at some point we will.
Anyway, go follow us on Blue Sky.
We posted about this that SB 382 acquired 220 some odd million dollars for hurricane relief,
quote unquote, right?
And then the federal government came behind and said that we're going to give $9 billion
for hurricane relief funds.
So it really a drop in the bucket compared to what the federal government was able to
give us.
And it almost seemed like they sold the government down the river for something that was not
even close to the amount that was actually needed.
Yeah, most definitely.
We can talk about this a little bit last time, but I just can't talk about this again for
just a second.
You know, Christmas just happened.
So I was doing a bunch of traveling out in Western North Carolina.
And yeah, no, there's still devastation over there.
And yeah, you know, the help or so-called help we're getting from this state bill is
absolutely ridiculous.
It's an insult.
It's an insult to the citizens as more Carolinians and it's an insult to their intelligence
as well.
Yeah, help is a strong word.
It's doing a lot of heavy lifting.
Yeah, yeah.
And it's just it's disrespectful to them in general.
Like I said, last time that area has been taken advantage of so many times by both parties
really, but you know, to see them be used as this excuse for passing something absolutely
ridiculous is infuriating.
Yeah, sorry.
That's my little rant.
No, no, you're good.
So there's a couple of people that we are very sad to see go in the general election
that just occurred this year.
But there's also a couple of people that we are very happy to see get ousted.
One of those people that were sad to see have to hang it up is Diamond Staten Williams
out of District 73.
That's in Cabarrus County.
She was defeated by Jonathan Almond.
It was not really that close of a race when the result happened.
And would you say that this is an issue of the campaign?
Do you think it was an issue of funding?
Because it seemed to me that they got a lot of funding.
They had to change horses midstream in terms of their campaign staff.
Yeah, I'll be honest with you.
Just looking at the final result, I'm not sure that would have that even made a difference
just because of how how many votes they lost by.
I think it was just, I'll be honest with you.
I don't know the district that well.
I don't know.
Maybe it was just turnout issue or if it was just a turnout was 73 percent.
So it wasn't a turnout, at least not for Republicans.
I don't know.
It might have been for Democrats.
They can do a little bit more of a deep dive on that maybe next time if you want.
But it seemed to me that, A, it was a gerrymandering issue.
They just made this area way more competitive for Republicans with whatever they could get
away with.
Staten Williams, I think she ran a fine campaign.
I think her campaign managers did well.
It just wasn't.
Yeah, like you said, when you have a difference of like eight points, it's not really something
that you could have done clearly, there was just a demographic challenge there.
Yeah, I agree.
And I hate that because she was great.
Yeah.
And they were the campaign was really, really good too.
When we were looking at some of the things they were doing online, some of the things
they were doing with in interviews and just with the amount of turnout for like canvassing
and phone banking and stuff, they were killing it.
One common thread that we've started to see in races here in North Carolina, maybe across
the country, I'm sure there's a lot of people who would agree that some of the traditional
methods, at least this is my opinion, CJ, you can butt in and tell me I'm wrong.
In my opinion, there are a lot of old ways of campaigning that are simply not working
anymore.
Like canvassing, like phone banking, I think it's good for get out the vote.
I think it's good for engaging voters that want to be engaged.
But in terms of getting out new voters from what I can tell, there is a lot of money and
time being spent on things that are simply not going to be working anymore.
Yeah.
And I...
Specifically, canvassing.
But I think I have it out for canvassing because it just seems to me like it's a lot
of work for not a whole lot of gain.
But that's just me.
I know that there are studies that say that it is quite effective in certain ways.
Yeah.
I mean, I think one of the big things is...
Or one thing is, I think there is a place for canvassing.
I think there is a place for phone banking and all these kind of traditional methods.
There is a place for phone banking, a place for canvassing, these traditional methods,
as you phrased it.
But I think they do also really need to be integrated with these newer approaches, with
text banking, with heavy social media use.
Absolutely.
A lot of people...
Or you might have some people who can't be reached through canvassing, through doorknob,
because they just live out in the middle of nowhere, essentially.
So you need to fill in the gap with either phone banking or fill it in with texting or
something.
I think there are all these things, you just have to learn how to integrate, because your
audience is changing on a yearly basis, really.
You have older people, the older populists, the older electorate, some of them are unfortunately
literally dying off.
True.
Yeah.
I know that sounds morbid.
No, I don't mean to laugh.
It's just very true.
And you need to be able to adapt to a younger electorate that's coming up.
You got millennials, you got Gen Z, and you'll have Gen Alpha here in what, next?
Five, 10-ish years, I think, is when the oldest Gen Alpha will be turning 18.
Oh my gosh.
I know, right?
Yeah.
But you're right.
We're facing a generational reality where these new blocks of voters are aging up, and
some of them are aging out, so to speak.
Right.
I would say maybe not the state Democratic Party.
I think they're doing okay.
Like the North Carolina Democratic Party is doing really well at attracting newer younger
voters because, not to say that Anderson Clayton is the end-all be-all in achieving that, but
the very fact that we have somebody so young at the head of the party that's actually doing
a really, really great job, I think that is inspiring for a lot of younger folks.
And we've seen that on the ground, too.
Oh yeah, no, it's definitely not, I've got to say Anderson is fantastic.
But at the national level, here's where we run into some problems because we have, I
mean, it was a big story this week about the oversight committee being given to Jerry Connolly,
who's a 74-year-old cancer patient.
These are the kinds of problems that are going to trickle down and that people are going
to see, you know, when they associate the term Democrat or Democratic Party, this is
the kind of thing that is going to trickle down and say to them, they don't actually
care about young people.
And you can bet that the right is harnessing and utilizing those talking points right this
second, even if we're not seeing it.
Everybody's talking too much about how we need the next Joe Rogan or the next two white
guys on a podcast and not necessarily talking about how legislatively we need to be doing
more to bring new voices into the fold, especially the ones on the left wing.
Yeah.
And someone like, you know, AOC who has such a high profile, such a well-known name brand,
so to say, like to have her not be in some position of power within the party or within
Congress, let's say, I think is a huge loss.
Huge misstep.
I think it's a giant fumble that did not need to have him that could have been avoided
because here's the thing, like the torch is going to have you passed eventually, you
know, pass the torch while you still have a group of people to lead.
Yeah.
But the last time that was set on a national stage was in 2020 when Eric Swalwell basically
pleaded with then former vice president Biden to pass the torch onto the younger generation.
And then he went on to win the general election.
Yep.
Not just the primary, but like the mandate for new leadership doesn't seem to be resonating
with the older Democratic Party and it needs to.
Because, you know, as much as we will not side with people on the right, they are harnessing
that.
Oh, no.
And we got to get on that.
Yeah.
No, they're good at that.
I mean, you know, say what you know about Republicans about, you know, their beliefs,
their tactics, their methodology and all that stuff.
They're not stupid.
Right.
There's a ruthlessness to it for sure.
Yeah.
As well.
They are very good at what they do.
And I think it's important to recognize that.
Yeah.
It doesn't mean we're, you know, condoning it or anything like that.
But it's important to, you know, recognize that they're good at this and that, you know,
they know how to adapt.
They know how to play the long game.
And we've been, you know, behind for years at this point, decades.
Especially if you want to start talking about stuff like Southern strategy and Nixon and
Reagan and all that.
Well, just, I mean, the 30, 40, 50 year plan to get rid of Roe v. Wade, you know, that
was put into place when the decision came down.
This is not new stuff.
This is not a new track.
Like we talk about on the left, people tend to talk at great length about like Prager
you and stuff like that, and while it may seem stupid and ridiculous to us on the right
end of the spectrum, there is a torch that is being passed.
It is being passed.
Like yes, Trump is old.
We get that he's old.
That argument works for them.
It's not going to work for us.
They don't care.
So we need to find the flank, right?
How do you outflank them?
Outflank everybody in 2016 by being the guy who was willing to say whatever to get elected
into office.
What started out as a joke ended up becoming a winning presidential race.
And then in 2024, we saw it yet again, except it was different this time because he was
somehow able to color himself as an outsider still.
Just somebody who was not part of the establishment, even though he is the establishment at this
point.
What Democrats need to stop doing is catering to the establishment.
We see this time and time and time again.
We had rolled out Bill Clinton in the middle of Kamala's campaign.
He went out there to talk to Jewish audiences in Michigan.
But the problem was that in Michigan, there was a huge Muslim majority population that
was boycotting the Democratic Party.
You needed somebody to go out there to talk to them.
But instead, they catered not to the issue, not to the demographic, but to the establishment,
to the guy whose turn it was.
It's Bill Clinton.
And I get, you know, there's some adoration for Bill Clinton.
I'm not trying to say that it's not undue.
But in the interest of trying to subvert what the entire argument of the right is, is that,
oh, well, Democrats are just beholden to the establishment.
They're beholden to the moneyed interests.
We are not, which is a lie.
Prove them wrong.
That's all I'm asking.
Yeah.
And again, it just goes back to knowing your audience, knowing, that's my phrase this.
It goes to being in touch with your voters.
No, it does.
It goes to being in touch and it goes to actually planning and it goes to trying to build for
the future.
I think one of the problems that Democrats have is that they just, they don't plan, right?
Yeah, that tends to happen.
Yeah.
It's just the next person's turn.
Okay, cool.
I get that.
You know what?
That person's been there for a while.
You know, it seems right.
It seems fair, so to say, right?
I get that.
I get that approach.
What feels right and what is right for the party and for the future and for party strategy
can be two completely different things.
Right.
You know, need to be building our base before we lose our base.
And not freaking out like you did in 2016 after Hillary lost and saying, actually, we
need to move further to the right.
We need to move further to the center because that's how we're going to capture votes.
And this is something that I've talked about before and why that's not going to work.
You were co-signing what the right has been saying all along.
If you abandon the causes from the left and say, okay, those aren't going to work electorally
anymore.
Those aren't going to work for us.
We're going to have to move to the right.
You're basically signaling to everybody else, oh, sorry about that.
We lied and the Republicans were right all along, actually.
So now when people go to the ballot box, they're going to say, well, I mean, A, Democrats are
hypocrites and B, Republicans were right all along.
So I'm just going to vote for the Republican because at least they're going to be straight
with me.
I might like everything they do, but at least they're going to be, which again, can't stress
this enough.
They're not being straight with you.
They're lying through their teeth to your face.
This is not me saying, oh, but Republicans are truthful.
No, they're just liars and they will continue to lie.
But they know how to sell their lies in a way that is palatable and acceptable by people.
Yeah.
There is a tent of fear behind every sheet of policy.
It doesn't continue to get voters because it's good policy.
It continues to get voters because they up the ante every time.
We have people asking questions about illegal immigration in states like North Carolina
where it's not even close to the same amount of of an issue as it is on the border states.
Why is anybody even really talking about this?
What we should be talking about is education and healthcare and all of the things that
this state is behind on, which we should be way ahead of everybody else on.
Exactly.
And yet, you know, Republicans bring this type of stuff up.
They bring up this cultural war stuff.
They bring up this fear of the other.
They stoke that fear because they know that if they were to talk about their policy, they
would be booed and laughed out of town because a lot of their policies are actually really
unpopular.
Yeah.
They run on them.
Just disregarded as unmanageable.
Like from a purely policy perspective, from even just a reality perspective, a lot of
the things that they talk about, once you get down to the nitty gritty, it's not good
for everybody.
It's good for a select few.
This is the same here in this state as it is at the federal level.
People keep talking about tariffs and they're starting to figure out what tariffs actually
do.
We're going to be in a heap ton of trouble come the next few years.
I hope I'm wrong.
I really do.
Like I don't want to be right in this instance.
We get somebody reelected like Steve Troxler, who is almost single handedly responsible
for the most amount of land sold to foreign investors that was originally agricultural
land.
Now, instead of being one of the number one states on the Eastern Seaboard that has an
actual agricultural economy, North Carolina is falling behind again.
We used to be...
There was a point in time in which we could have been the state that grew tobacco, that
grew cotton, that grew corn, that grew... Heck, even marijuana.
There was a point in time where we could have been the number one hemp supplier in the...
Well, maybe not the world, but in the United States.
We missed the boat on that because of people like Steve Troxler.
Who just won re-election, by the way?
But people vote for folks like that because maybe they don't pay attention to what's actually
happening or maybe they just don't care and they see an R beside the name and that's
that.
Well, that's definitely part of it is they just see the R beside the name.
They know that they've been told over and over again that Republicans are better for
the economy and so that's the way they vote.
So what has to happen at the national level, because this isn't going to really happen
at the state level, what has to happen at the national level has to be an entire redirect
on the Democratic Party's part to shore up support for how they actually do their economic
agenda.
And we saw it in the 90s with Bill Clinton and the neoliberals.
I'm not saying that's what we should do.
In fact, I'm saying we should not do that because what ended up happening was we got
Bush elected with that.
So the point I'm trying to make is that whatever is not working, you have to look at what will
work.
Because telling people...
Telling people the economy is great when they feel like the economy is not great is not
good messaging.
It's bad messaging, actually.
And that's why people say that Democrats are so bad at messaging because you're telling
me I'm getting a steak sandwich or you're telling me that I'm getting a steak.
But to me, it just looks like a slab of beef that hasn't been cooked quite right to me.
I don't want it like this.
You got to sell me on it, man.
You really do.
Yeah.
You've got to think about the perception versus the reality or the reality versus the perception.
Right.
You know, unemployment numbers during the election were actually pretty good, right?
Yeah.
But like, and prices weren't half bad, especially compared to how they were during Trump's
term, and they got better.
Right.
But still, that doesn't matter because people still felt, they still perceived that things
were expensive.
And not to mention the fact that...
Well, it's like they just figured out that inflation happened for the first time.
Yeah.
And I don't think there's enough...
Personally, I don't think there's enough messaging or, I guess, relatable messaging
on stuff like inflation or on the fact that a lot of these prices were at least partly
due to the fact that, you know, companies want to make as much money as possible, so
they raise the prices on a bunch of stuff.
Yeah.
For no good reason.
Well, and when we talk about like price gouging and stuff, this is exactly what we mean.
On top of that, you know, we talk about unions too.
They're not paying people enough.
But the right has successfully pushed this message into the political landscape that
if prices go up, then they need to just come down.
Not to mention that just lowering prices would lead to deflation, and that would actually
be really, really bad for the economy.
But then when we talk about raising wages for people, all of a sudden, no, we can't
do that because then prices will go up because people would get paid more.
Okay, so you keep everybody at just enough of a wage that they can live, and then that's
good enough for Republicans.
That's fine.
Just ignoring the fact that we have an entire apparatus devoted to making sure that the
working class to not have adequate unionization and to not have adequate representation in
our government.
Yeah.
We've got lobbyists for everything now, but when it comes to the representatives that
are supposed to pass laws protecting workers' rights, who knows who's bought and sold?
Even when you're going to the ballot box, the average voter does not know what people
have, who has actually been paid what, and by what?
By what PACs?
What PACs do what?
Who cares?
I got to go to work in the morning.
Right.
I'll vote for a Republican because at least they're telling me it's straight.
That's what they think.
Yeah.
And you know what?
I can't blame them.
I really can't.
Like I said last episode, I think, everyone's busy with their lives.
They're concerned about the food on the table.
They're concerned about keeping the lights on.
They don't necessarily have time to, like I said, research like soil and water commissioner
or dog catcher or whatever.
They don't have time for that.
We need to, as a party, as Democrats, need to get better about our messaging so that
they don't have to go take that time and do the research.
Yeah.
And not just the Democratic Party, but people need to have conversations in the vein of,
hey, don't you think it'd be better to be paid more?
Yeah.
Don't you think it'd be better to have a living wage?
Don't you think it'd be better to not let these companies charge whatever they want
regardless?
Like, dude, a CEO literally went to prison because they were charging exorbitant amounts
for a cancer drug.
Oh, yeah.
Martin Screlli.
Yeah, God.
Dude's an absolute demon.
We get CEOs that get popped off in the street because at this point, there is a powder
keg and it keeps sparking.
There's a spark that keeps almost hitting the powder keg.
There are so many people that are so destitute and just hanging on the edge of society.
And then they hear people say, they hear Trump say, we're going to make your groceries
cheaper.
And simply, that is a better message than what Kamala and her team started saying.
At first, she was saying price, that we're going to stop price gouging.
And then they started trying to step away from that because they thought it sounded too
socialist.
People started comparing it to price control and that price control is communist and you
can't do that.
No, you just stay on that.
They should have just kept going because Trump never got the...
Trump was never pressed on how he was actually going to keep groceries down.
And we just saw it in the last couple of weeks that when he was interviewed, he doesn't
actually have a plan to keep groceries, to bring grocery prices down.
He didn't even know they were called groceries.
This is the insanity that just continues to permeate the American electorate.
We have people who have no idea how these things work, that will spout off on TikTok
Live and say that Trump's just going to make everything better, but they don't understand
how.
And we can't get mad at them for not understanding because they just don't.
They've been fed a lie.
Yeah.
And once you get fed that fed a lie so many times to you, it is reality.
And to have someone come around and contradict that reality, it messes with your head a bit.
Is that cognitive dissonance?
Sure does.
Especially when you realize that what you should be doing means voting against what
you have been voting for for a while now.
Yeah.
And I think it's interesting.
For a lot of people, whether they consider themselves political or not, their views are
a lot of times based off of their personal beliefs, not just spiritual, religious, but
just their values.
And so for them or for a lot of people, whenever you start to attack or say attack, they perceive
it as attack, whenever you start to question or try to push back or even sometimes just
ask them about their political beliefs or their values or whatever and then introduce
information that might challenge it, they take it as an attack because it's not necessarily
that you're attacking politics or you're attacking a belief.
You're attacking them personally because it's so internalized.
Yeah.
I completely agree.
I think that people are, especially on the right, whether they feel like that or not,
that they are very triggered about the way that they are supposed to feel about things.
People on the left can be for sure.
There are a lot of people that I'm sure that you would agree tend to be very combative
and non-cooperative on things.
They don't really like to work well with others because working with others means they have
to sacrifice some of the more stalwart positions that they hold on certain things and they
don't want to give that up.
The left is very fractured in a lot of places, but the right is also, they just don't realize
it most of the time.
What you can do, this is for anybody out there who is listening that is thinking about talking
to their relatives or their friends that may be more on the right end of the spectrum or
people that may have voted for Trump who just don't know anything or people who are not
involved in politics.
They don't want to be involved in it in any way.
Two things that you have to do.
You have to relate everything back to real life.
You have to show the actual ramifications of elections and the policies that are put in
place by politicians that do actually affect your everyday life.
You can't just say, oh well, local elections matter more.
No, they've probably heard that a hundred times, but you have to show them.
You have to have tangible evidence as to what has happened.
That is one of the only things that has worked for me personally.
I think it'll be interesting here in let's say a year, year and a half as we're heading
into midterm.
I want to see campaigns, I want to see people run for Congress doing comparisons of say
the price of eggs at that point versus a year and a half before, two years before, three
years before or whatever, or the price of imported goods.
These tangible things.
I want to see that stuff presented so people can actually see, oh, okay, essentially does
make a difference.
They're holding their feet to the fire and saying, this is what you voted for.
It's not FAFO.
It's just you clearly did not understand what the ramifications were going to be.
Here it is right here in front of you.
This is what you voted for.
People say already that SB 382 was a good thing because it's going to help North Carolinians
in Western North Carolina.
We both know that's not the case.
Governor Cooper knows that that's not the case.
That's why they're suing.
Governor Cooper and incoming Governor Josh Stein have actually filed a second lawsuit.
I don't know if you saw this that is battling the changes that they've made to the boards
of elections, which people that this sounds so boring.
If you know nothing about politics, who cares?
This is like your local board of elections, whatever.
It's just a bunch of stuffy suits that sit in a room and pour over pieces of paper and
say yes or no.
No, this is incredibly important.
This is actually mind bogglingly.
You think that changing the position of the governor or the attorney general and what
they're allowed to do is a big power grab.
This is even bigger.
This is at the local level that they're trying to change the government so that they can modify
how we actually conduct our elections and they can pick and choose who can be part of
it.
The lawsuit takes issue with the restructuring of the election boards.
This is from portcitydaily.com, but I mean this is from a bunch of different.
This is Wilmington NC local newspaper.
The governor and governor elect's recent lawsuit takes issue with the restructuring
of election boards.
It calls the bill's provisions.
Past only a week after a new Democratic governor was elected, a blatant misuse of power to
curtail the incoming top state leaders authority.
We already know that SB 382 transfers appointment from the state board of elections from the
governor to the state auditor, incoming Republican Dave Bulyak, who's taking over on who will
take over appointing the board May 1st of next year, which means he gets to appoint 100
board chairs in all counties.
Who do you think he's going to pick?
Exactly, Loyalists.
Loyalists, Republicans, people who regardless of how your county voted in 2024 will probably
not be well represented in your county.
Right, and so think about what that ends up being.
You got provisional ballots, let's say, of people.
What's to stop these local boards from now being like, well, we're Loyalists, so any
Democrat ballot?
Yeah.
Yeah, shouldn't be accepted.
But hey, this Republican ballot that has the exact same problems as this Democrat one,
let one go through.
I'm not saying there shouldn't be any type of like there.
What am I trying to say?
There needs to be like bipartisanship on these boards, you know?
Sure.
And I already know what people are going to say.
Well, the ability to place the ability to appoint board chairs was originally the governor's
decision, which I would counter with what does the state auditor, what kind of experience
or expertise does the state auditor have to make these decisions?
Right.
This is a guy who is an accountant.
What does this have to do with election board appointments across all 100 counties of North
Carolina?
And if you think that that's weird, this would make North Carolina the only state nationwide
that allows its elections administration to be overseen by the state auditor.
That's insane.
It doesn't make sense at all.
He's not vested with the same authority under the Constitution like the governor is either.
The state auditor is not somebody is a statewide elected office, but it's not the same oversight.
The governor has to appoint state boards of elect or the chairs of the board of elections.
And then that oversight can be dealt with by the other two branches, right?
But the state auditor isn't beholden to that.
He's part of the council of state.
The only qualification that he has for being able to do this is being a Republican.
I'm guaranteed if he had not won, they would not be vesting interest.
They would not be vesting authority of the state board of elections in the state auditor,
which would have been just goms.
It's absolutely obscene.
It is.
And it's a slap in the face to our Democrat access.
And it's so blatant is what gets me.
Like it is so so obvious what they are trying to do.
And it is just the absolute lack of shame.
It's blatant and it's not new.
They tried this in 2016 when when Governor Cooper ousted Pat McCrory.
So they tried to pass SB4, which was an attempt to strip the governor of the state board of
elections appointment power and increase board member makeup.
But the courts ruled it by a rule that it violated the NC State Constitution.
Right.
And you might be saying, oh, OK, well, that's good because then that means that they're
probably going to strike it down again because it's unconstitutional.
Why did you laugh there, CJ?
Oh, no, no, particular reason.
They tell the audience.
Well, it's could it possibly because the state, the state Supreme Court is wholly beholden
to the state legislature, which and its makeup isn't almost entirely Republican?
Perhaps.
Yeah.
That might just be why.
Yeah.
So I think counting on them to side with the incoming Democratic governor on this, even
if they do, OK, let's say the the that cooler heads prevail, they get their heads out of
their proverbial asses and they decide, you know what, the law is important and we need
to uphold it.
This is obviously a power grab and should not be handled by the state board of elections
should not be handled by the state auditor, a glorified accountant.
OK.
So the problem is that on the that's one flank, right, they're going to try to use the courts
to subvert power of the ability of the governor to appoint state board of electors or state
state board chairs on the other side, on the other flank, the SB 3382 also called for a
constitutional convention, which means that sometime next year, we might see an attempt
by this legislature to change the state's constitution so that now this will no longer
be something that the governor can renege that this is something that it is going to
be this way and nothing can change that without a constitutional amendment.
Right.
That is why this bill was so important.
The constitutional convention, if it happens, would be a makeup of the people who represent
the House and the state Senate.
We already know due to the makeup of those people, it's not going to be on our side.
Right.
And so let me ask you this.
So what would you say to the folks who might be listening from the other side who might
just be like, oh, well, boo-hoo, you lost.
Get over it.
That's what happened.
I mean, the obvious first response would be if the Democrats were in charge with the
speed, something that seems fair to you.
What I would also say is regardless of all of that, you have to consider the law of political
reciprocity.
What affects you today, whatever you put in place, whatever you say or put into policy
will come back to bite you someday.
If there is a complete political realignment within the next 15 to 20 years where Democrats
take back control of the House and the state Senate, what's going to be your plan then?
Because 2010 was a huge year for Republicans.
They flipped the House and came back in a big way.
But it's not over yet.
And there's a long way to go.
The politics is not set in stone.
So this is your chance.
This is your chance to try and put, set things in stone, but I can almost guarantee you that
no matter how deep you try to dig those claws, there's going to be a way for us to turn around
and use it against you.
So beware.
That's what I would say.
Nice.
Yeah, I mean, I completely agree.
I completely agree.
And honestly, I could have probably summed that all up by just using the age old adage.
What goes around comes around.
Yeah.
But what, 30 years until an entirely new generation, a couple new generations are able to vote,
right?
Again, this is not something that's set in stone.
We can't see the future.
We don't know what's going to happen even 10 years from now.
But what I can tell you is that our job and the job of the people on the left, the Democratic
Party, especially, is to remind people that just because it is the way it is right now,
doesn't mean it always was that way.
And anything that happens in the future needs to be fought against.
These lawsuits, these changes that they're making to the state board of elections cannot
be normalized.
This is not normal.
And Democrats cannot acquiesce to the norms as they are so want to do.
Because if they do, then it's going to be an issue of, well, yeah, we could do that,
but that's just not the way things work.
What we need to be asking ourselves and each other is not why not, but how.
Right.
We need to show that we are willing to and can put up a fight.
Yes, absolutely.
What was it we were talking about last week?
A Timothy Snyder's book.
Oh, do not obey an advance.
Yes.
Do not obey an advance.
And so his second lesson, and Timothy Snyder's second lesson is defend and defend.
And the only problem that I have with that is that if the institution is something that
is irrespective of the will of the people, is irrespective of the reality that people
are living in this state, you have to fight it.
It is a resistance.
There are invaluable ideas that keep getting shuttered in the dark because the norms of
the state go against what it is.
We can't acquiesce to totalitarianism, especially not within a one-party structure or a two-party
structure because it will become a one-party structure if they're allowed to legislate
one party out of existence.
That's exactly what they're trying to do here in North Carolina.
There are a couple of interesting numbers here.
So in the North Carolina Senate election, the state Senate election, last election,
the Republicans had 30 seats.
This year they have 30 seats.
And the Democrats had 20, and this election they have 20.
One thing that changed was there was a nine-point swing for Democrats, 9% from 2022.
And what that says to me is two things.
That 2022 was a massive problem for Democrats.
People just did not turn up.
What it also says to me is that when you look at this 47.98% versus 50.17%, Republicans
and Democrats respectively, this is a purple state or a polka dot state, however you want
to frame it.
But the way that the lines are drawn, this legislature is gerrymandered to hell.
Yeah, no, without doubt.
This is not a new thing that I'm pointing out.
This is not some revelation.
These are things that have been fought about in the courts and in the campaigns for years
now.
It's going to continue to take time and you can't give up.
You have to keep fighting it.
You have to keep asking yourself how long are we going to take it before we have to
turn this thing around?
Because 2028 is going to come around.
That's going to be a big year because it's going to be the next presidential election.
It's going to be the next gubernatorial election.
Council state, all that's going to be back up and running.
We're going to have two judicial seats that are going to be up grabs.
But why it's even more important is it sets up for a battle two years later in 2030 when
the makeup of that house, the makeup of that state senate is going to determine how the
lines are going to be drawn in 2032, what this state's going to look like in 10 years.
That's going to determine what the makeup is going to be.
That's scary, but it's something you were talking earlier about.
We have to plan ahead of time.
You're absolutely right.
We need to be planning 10 years down the road.
But we're two years behind already.
And I think the Republicans, they practice a war of attrition essentially.
So for those who aren't really familiar with what the idea is, it's essentially a military
strategy that attempts to win by wearing down the opponent, really collapsing their personnel,
their morale, all that stuff.
Really almost a psychological sort of thing.
And I think we've seen those effects in the Democratic Party before Harris came in.
A lot of Democrats were accepting certain defeats in November because of Biden and all this
stuff.
The morale for the party was hanking.
And we can talk about Biden and him running again another time.
But I also think part of it is just Republicans are just really good at this.
They're really good at wearing down people.
And so I think it's important to realize that and to kind of keep that in mind when planning
our own strategies as a party.
Because it's not going to be so easily won every single time.
It's not like everything is going to be better because we just hope better for it.
We have to have the strength to continue to work at the things that are hard.
Yeah, exactly.
The things that are hard are worth fighting for.
It sure are.
And I think we did get a little bit off topic for the last 30 minutes.
But no, that's OK.
I think I think it's good for us to contextualize to people why this is so important.
I think somebody who has done a great job of contextualizing why the next elections
are so important and why the judicial elections are so important is Anderson Clayton.
And again, have to say at the end of this episode that we we are not paid for by the
Democratic Party, at least not anymore.
And or George Soros.
I mean, hey, man, give me some of that cash if you got some laying around, though, I'm
not going to I'm not going to say no.
We're not paid by any of those insane conspiracy theories that the right have.
No.
And I wish right now.
I mean, we we are a very, very small team.
It's just me and CJ and our technical and political know how.
So what I will say at the bottom of the show is that if you've made it this far into the
episode, thank you so much for listening, you guys are amazing and also we have a Patreon
up and running now or you can buy us a coffee and all those links are going to be in all
of our social media and our link tree.
You can go to YouTube and see a visualization of all this where it will have different numbers
and figures and things like that that we talk about throughout the episode.
All visuals that you can follow along to follow us on Blue Sky, follow us on the X follow
us on a bunch of different places so that you can get the word out about when new episodes
drop and also so you can keep yourself abreast of the things that are going on in the state
because as we said before, knowledge is power and not being knowledgeable is work, unfortunately.
So to wrap this all up, one thing I wanted to talk about right at the end is November
5th, the election happened January 3rd, our new delegation from North Carolina and the
rest of the House and Senate at the US Capitol are going to be sworn in and on the 6th, we're
going to have a not so new president.
Do you think that there is any chance that Kamala pulls the opposite of Mike Pence and
just decides not to certify the election because that's what they were arguing for years that
Mike Pence should have done?
Just play their game a little bit.
Maybe give them just one little constitutional crisis.
Come on.
A little constitutional crisis as a treat.
January 6th, 2.0.
January 12th.
Now, she'll certify.
I mean, I think there's, I talk a lot about or we've talked a lot about how Democrats
allowed to kind of play the same old game.
They allowed to abide by the rules and all this stuff and how that's not always the most
helpful thing.
This, however, I will say a peaceful transfer of power is essential in a democracy.
It really is.
If you want to keep a democracy.
And so, yeah, now she'll certify and everything with no problem.
Yeah.
There's a part of me that wishes they, even at the end, she could just say, just kidding.
And then we continue on with it.
It's a whatever.
Don't be so serious.
It really does suck that the left is demonized for so much.
And then when it really comes down to it, a lot of the Democrats will just continue
to stick to the norms, stick to the rules, which, as you said, is important and that
is how the game should be played.
But too often people give Republicans too much credit for cheating.
And I don't mean cheating in the traditional sense of, well, you stole, stole ballots or
you rigged ballots or things like that.
That's not what I'm talking about.
Cheating as in rigging the system so that even if it doesn't look like it should work
in your favor.
It does putting certain people in certain positions of power so that you have leverage
over them.
Trump's going to be even more unhinged this time because he does not have people around
him that are going to say no.
There are no adults in the room.
Yeah.
So we have four years to figure it out.
And already Kamala is polling above everybody else as a potential for president in 2028.
We can maybe talk about that next time.
Because I feel like that's a whole can of worms.
I have very strong opinions about how they should and should not run.
Little spoiler for next week, I think, then is maybe let's take another look at that strategy.
But that's all for this week.
Thank you so much for tuning in.
Thank you for listening and subscribing and all that stuff.
Make sure to subscribe and hit the bell if you're listening on YouTube.
Make sure to follow us on Instagram, YouTube, TikTok, Blue Sky, wherever you listen to your
podcasts they are available.
Or you can just go straight to our RSS feed and listen from there.
Regardless, thanks for listening.
Let's stick through this.
We got this.
Keep hanging on with us on the left of Old North.
Happy New Year to everyone.
Happy New Year.
Yeah.
Hang on, I'm going to get my cat out of my room.
No, you're good.
My cat's been laying on my lap for the past 30 minutes.