Speaker 1: From the historic Memart Parks in Los Angeles, California.
Speaker 2: I'm Tavis Smiley and I'm so glad to see you
and me Ah back in stride again. Before we get
started with today's show, I mean not you to follow
me on Facebook and Instagram at the Real Tavis Smiley
and get updates on x that's formerly Twitter at Tavis Smiley.
By the way, should you miss any product today's program
or want to catch up on previous shows, you can
always visit the Tavismileyshow dot com.
Speaker 1: That's the Tavismightyshow dot com or.
Speaker 2: Wherever you get your podcast and listen to the Tavismodley
podcast version of this live program at your leisure.
Speaker 1: Another great show on tap for you today.
Speaker 2: It's Thursday, so we'll check in with doctor Cornell West
on the top side.
Speaker 1: Of our two as per usual.
Speaker 2: On the b side of our too, a new study
from cal Berkeley which finds that DEI policies resulted in
no financial penalties for companies that did not abandon their
commitment to diversity, equity and inclusion. So for all that talk,
ain't nobody been harmed by not abandoning This corrective program
called de e I, and we'll talk to UC Brooklyn
Professor Jacob Grumbach uh uh on the backside. Uh and
I should say in in our two there you go
get it right, Doctor West top side, it's it's been
a long week. Dr West on the top side of
our two. Professor Jacob Grumback on the b side of
our two.
Speaker 3: And then in our third hour, I'm just crazy, vow you.
Speaker 4: You make me feel so good. I am about to
rouse my word, trying to find.
Speaker 1: Any way I can see here next to.
Speaker 4: You word I found rely fund follow to satisfied Cray.
Speaker 1: Say that you be Mody.
Speaker 2: Common Lundy was named the twenty twenty six National Endowment
for the.
Speaker 1: Arts jazz Master.
Speaker 2: This year, we will celebrate Common Lundy when she comes
live in studio and our third and final Holaday to
talk about this high honor and her new album, It's
called Notes from the Wine Cellar. Carmen Lundy twenty twenty
six Jazz Master comes live in studio today in our
third hour.
Speaker 1: I'm looking forward to that. But in this first hour.
Speaker 2: When we come forward, we'll talk politics and more with
Ztail Media cognist Justin berg On.
Speaker 1: We'll start with if you're not for me with the tail,
We'll let Justin first tell you about ztail. You can
look it up.
Speaker 2: It's a great online site for news and information. So
we'll talk about zatel to begin with. And there's so
many issues to get to. Uh, this was yet another
history making primary week, So when we come forward, we'll
start by talking about how these progressive wins, to Justin's
mind at least, are shaping the primaries this year. You're
listening to Tavis smileing. Just burg On is the Tel's
media comminists. Please to have him on the start our
program today, Justin, how.
Speaker 1: Are you, sir?
Speaker 5: I'm doing fine? How you doing?
Speaker 2: If I complain, i'd being in great. I am doing
well and pleased to have you on the program. Tell
me about ztel for those not for me with the
with the platform, let's let's start there and we'll we'll
push forward.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I would say the TEO is what you would
call an unapologetically progressive news site, but still based in fact,
it was started by Mehdi Hassan, as your audience may
know him from his show on MSNBC and Al Jazeera,
and it's been growing quite a bit over the past
year and a half and we've broken quite a bit
of news, made quite a bit of news, and I
believe we'll keep doing that.
Speaker 1: Yep.
Speaker 2: What's it mean for a Zeteo. I know what it
means for our station here in La. What's it mean
for Zetello in a moment like this to be unapologetically
progressive unpacked?
Speaker 5: That?
Speaker 1: For me?
Speaker 5: Well, I think.
Speaker 6: At this moment, when when you have a the return
of a Trump administration, but a more vindictive Trump administration,
that's that's really trying to put its foot on the neck.
Speaker 5: Of the media to begin with that.
Speaker 6: You need you need news outlets that are going to
provide a different perspective but also aggressively pushed back against that.
And I believe that's what we're doing here. You know,
not you know, having any fear of favor when it
comes to calling out what's going on in the day
to day part of our politics and society, whether it
has anything to do with you know, our wars overseas,
what's going on in Israel and Gaza, what's going here domestically,
what's going on with people's pocketbooks.
Speaker 5: I think.
Speaker 6: You need to have an independent style media that isn't
going to have a corporate over that's going to be,
you know, curring favor with this administration.
Speaker 5: That's the way I look at it at least.
Speaker 1: YEP. So we all saw the news a few days ago.
Speaker 2: Just a couple more inside baseball media questions and we'll
get to the issues of the day.
Speaker 1: We saw the news. We shall the news few days ago,
ABC suing the FCC.
Speaker 2: And I sort of laughed at that when I saw that,
because here ABC now has grown a pair.
Speaker 1: And they want to sue the FCC.
Speaker 2: But wasn't ABC like one of the networks he started
us down in his rabbit hole in the first place.
Speaker 6: Yeah, That's what I had remembered too. Back in December
twenty twenty four, right after Trump had won his second term.
Speaker 5: You know, of the many media.
Speaker 6: Organizations that Trump was taken aim at in suing even
before he got back in the office, was ABC News
over the George Stephanopolis interview with Nancy Mason, which Stephanopolis, uh,
you know, multiple times during that interview noted that Trump
had been adjudicated for rape, you know, found liable for that,
and that that was more of like a semantics argument,
to be honest. Even the judge had pointed that out,
and what he was referring to was the Eging Carol,
you know, the ruling in that, you know, where Trump
was found liable for sexual abuse in battery as well
as defaming eging Carrol, and you know, the sexual abuse
and rape, it's more on just you know, it's just
a figure of speech almost for the way that the
judge it pointed. I was like, you know, for all
intents and purposes, sexual abuse is rape, but you know,
Stephanopolis has said rape. Immediately after that, Trump decided he
was going to sue ABC News for defamation once he
wins office. Disney decides they don't want to have this
hanging over them anymore. It's time to maybe play low
ball with the new administration. So they decided to just
settle with him for fifteen million dollars to Trump's presidential
library and a million dollars at Trump's lawyers.
Speaker 5: So then he gets to.
Speaker 6: Win, and then you know, they even issued essentially an
apology over what Stephanopolis had said. So I remember at
that time writing or speaking to different First Amendment experts,
journalism professors, media executives on how you know Disney by
doing this they were opening a door for a greater
chilling effect on freedom of speech and press that this
wasn't this was going to really allow Trump to go
forward and you know, wage his full fledged war against
the media, specifically the media he doesn't like that, you know,
And that's exactly what it happened. I mean, we saw
so many different lawsuits harassment of media organizations and you know,
attempts to bring them to heal or you had capitulation
by other outlets or media owners, whether it be the
Washington Post or the Los Angeles Times, where they decided
where they decided that they were going to push their
newspapers into a more conservative friendly direction. And then we
also had you know, we see the situation that happened
with Paramount and CBS News and how that they essentially
turned CBS News into like a Fox News Light after
David Allison purchased Paramount, but even prior to that, you know,
to make sure that that merger went through between Paramounts Skidands,
the old owners made sure to settle a meritless lawsuit
with CBS News. So yes, long way around, ye Disney
did start this.
Speaker 2: What's amazing about it is not just that they caved
and paid Trump almost twenty million dollars over the issue
that you raised earlier about Stephanopolis.
Speaker 1: They paid him all that money.
Speaker 2: Then then you fast forward some months, the administration goes in.
Speaker 1: Donald Trump goes in on Jimmy Kimmel. What does ABC do?
Speaker 2: They sideline Jimmy Kimmel, and everybody's up in arms about
what happens to Jimmy Kimmel. A few weeks later, a
few days later, whatever, Jimmy Kimmel comes back, and now
that same ABC is now soon the FCC overholding onto
its license.
Speaker 1: So there are number of ways to read this. ABC
a long time to get here.
Speaker 2: The other way to read it is that you know
when their license is on the line again, ABC finds
a spine and now they are suing the FCC. I
don't want to study this too long. I guess the
question is if I'll move on whether or not this
is literally about ABC trying to save its license, or
whether this is an example of a media network after
cow towing and bowing the knee bending the need of
Donald Trump has again finally reversed its course.
Speaker 5: I mean, I would also say.
Speaker 6: This is coming after they've seen the situation with a
number of different law firms that decided not to bend
the knee to Donald Trump over certain issues. I think
they were like whether it's DEI or a myriad of
issues of where Trump had said that you know, they
had done great damage and they needed to, you know,
provide his administration with hundreds of millions of dollars of
free work, and the ones that decided, know, what you're
doing is essentially unconstitutional, but you don't have the law
on your side, and then his executive orders were tossed out.
His attempts to push these law firms to you know,
bend the knee, as.
Speaker 5: You said, didn't work.
Speaker 6: Once you see that happening, you're like, wait a minute,
this administration where he may be a little more toothless
than we thought.
Speaker 5: And maybe we were a little.
Speaker 6: Bit hasty in trying to capitulate and acquiesce to him.
And I think that's part of what's going on here.
You know, you obviously, yes, they're going way too far.
They're you know, they're taken an authoritarian, almost fascistic push
against these media organizations, specifically against Disney, which they are
doing retaliatory. They are doing a retaliatory camp pain, as
they say in their lawsuit, because you know, they want
to make the view either go away or.
Speaker 5: You know, be more Trump friendly.
Speaker 6: And they want Jimmy Kimmel to no longer be there
because he says being things about Trump. So you know,
those are things that are going on there. But yeah,
is it about them trying to say their license? Sure?
Is it?
Speaker 5: You know they're standing up for the First Amendment.
Speaker 6: Maybe, but I think a lot of it is now
maybe we didn't need to have any fear against them
because they're also they're seeing what's going on in all these.
Speaker 5: Cases in the courts.
Speaker 6: I mean, the thing is the Trump administration is losing
tons of cases in the courts.
Speaker 1: I want to just remind this audience.
Speaker 2: I tried to a moment ago at least remind the
audience of the ABC backstory. And I asked, justin a
moment ago, whether or not this is just ABC trying
to save their hide or whether not ABC has found
its spine. The reality is that this is not about
ABC protecting First Amendment rights.
Speaker 1: That is what this is about.
Speaker 2: This is about ABC, as I said, try to hold
on its license. So when you consider the backstory, and
that ABC is the network that started us down this
rabbit hole.
Speaker 1: Now they're s in the FCC, and people.
Speaker 2: Are reporting this as if ABC is leading the charge
against the administration.
Speaker 1: Stop it, stop it, stop it.
Speaker 2: This is not, I repeat, about protecting our First Amendment rights.
They could have done that a year or two ago.
This is about ABC try and hold on to its
broadcast license. I'm done with it, but I want to
make sure that people understand that particular distinction. As I
pushed toward a conversation about this week's primaries and how
these progressive wins, to Justin's mind, are shaping the primary
season and what that means for the midterms and beyond,
since he mentioned Donald Trump and his sexual assault situation.
Not sure if you've heard this news, but there's a
new story out about this today. FBI agents execute did
search wants targeting former Democratic Representative Eric Swalwell and have
seized his electronic devices. One of the wants was executed
after Swallwell landed at San Francisco inter National Airport. The
second targeted his residence in d C. And so they
are seizing devices, smart devices from Eric Swalwall.
Speaker 1: Now why does that matter? Because earlier this week, as
a matter of fact, do you have a winter in
that race?
Speaker 5: Yet?
Speaker 1: I didn't even check if I came on the air yet.
Somebody tell me right quick.
Speaker 2: Earlier this week, the race was too close to call
in the special election here in California to replace Eric Swalwell.
You know the story of Eric Walwell, longtime member of Congress,
Donald Trump nemesis running for governor in California. Sexual allegations
come up, he has to drop out of the race.
He's the front runner at this point. As front run,
he has to drop out of the race. And so
now sometimes you think you drop out of a race
and your problems go away.
Speaker 1: Not really. He dropped out.
Speaker 2: His career has completely imploded, and the FBI is now
seizing his electronic devices.
Speaker 1: Again.
Speaker 2: We expected that because again he was a nemesis of
Donald Trump. So Trump's FBI is going after Eric S. Walwell,
and we shall see how this plays out. But it's
just fascinating that they seize his devices in the same
week that there's a special election to replace him in Congress.
And I don't know again whether or not there's a
winner declared in that race. Hit somebody would tell me
I'll get to you as soon as I know it.
But anyway, that was on Tuesday of this week, along
with other primaries that happened across the country. So what
are these progressive wins? These DSA wins just insane to
you about the way our politics are being reshaped, redefined.
Speaker 1: If you don't like those words, choose your own.
Speaker 6: I think it's at the very least it's redefining what
Democratic voters want now that maybe that they they're rarely
embracing many of these progressive values that these candidates are
are pushing. I think that's part of it. But I
think the main thing that's happening here is what they
want are fighters, right. They want people that aren't.
Speaker 5: For lack of a bear word, like squishes.
Speaker 6: People that you know that they don't want the same old,
same old that just that it had lost two elections
to Donald Trump, that lost the House, that lost the Senate. Right,
they don't want, you know, that, that style of politics anymore.
So they're looking for something more. And this is all
happening as you know, we are dealing with a growing
economic problem that that seems to be looming even more
in the distance.
Speaker 5: When it the economic inequality. You see gen z.
Speaker 6: Uh having a worse you know, lifestyle than than their predecessors.
So they're wanting change and you look for change ages
and this is why DSA is doing well now. At
the same end, I would point out that you know
a lot of DSA candidates aren't winning their primaries, but
they're they're putting up you know, heavy challenges. So so
I think, you know this, What do I see here
is again they want fighters. They want people that won't
just you know, try to get along, to play along
and all that.
Speaker 2: To your point about wanting fighters, just some new data
out here in California. This program is heard across the country,
as you know, uh and as I always say, for syndication,
national syndication, I'm grateful. But we're based in LA and
there are a couple of major races in LA.
Speaker 1: In California. People are watching, obviously the governor's race.
Speaker 2: It was quite a journey, but Javio Versara and Steve
Hilton are going to go at it in November. And
here in LA there was a big mayor's debate last night,
the first of the season. Everybody watching this mayor's race
to see whether this DSA candidate, city council Woman Nythia
Rahman can unseat the incumbent mayor, Karen Bass, longtime mainstream
establishment Democrat. So we're going to see what happens here
in California. There's a new data out here in the
Golden State which suggest that most voters feel favorably toward
progressive candidates with less enthusiasm for mainstream Democrats. That's new
data that most California voters favorably look toward or look
at progressive political campaigns and candidates with less enthusiasm for
mainstream Democrats. I believe that mainstream Democrats. I believe that
establishment Democrats in this cycle and even beyond are in trouble. Now,
if this trend holds, the question is what this means
for the demomocratic primaries come twenty twenty eight. If this
trajectory continues. If this trend holds, we'll see what it
means in November. But if Democrats across the country, even
beyond California, are looking for fighters, They're looking for folks
who are more progressive, They're turned on by the message
of these DSA candidates. What does that mean for the
kind of primary season we're going to have when people
start announcing they're running for president, if you're an establishment Democrat.
Speaker 1: Should you just stay home.
Speaker 2: Not even not even foul papers to get in the race,
because that seems to be where the party is headed.
We'll talk about that to do more than we come
forward here on Tavis Smile. Indeed, Justin berg go On,
who is the media cognist for the TAO, in our
first hour of pushing toward our two, which will kick
off for Doctor Cornell West as it does every Monday
and Thursday. Can't wait to get the doc. But Justin
is our guessing the first start kicking us off, and
I'm glad to have him. I have a colleague here
in La on my station, Justin, who hosts an amazing,
brilliant relationship show every night.
Speaker 1: His name is Zoe, and Zoe is a solo host.
Speaker 2: But he's fond of saying because he has a great
playlist every night, and he's fond of saying that my
playlist is my co host. That's Zoe Williams. My playlist
is my co host. My version of that is that
my audience is my research team. My audience is my
research team. I asked for information and low and behold,
within two minutes, fifty five folk around the country are
texting me the information or emailing me or posting on
social media the information that I've asked for. So I
asked moments ago, what's happening in the Eric Swalwell race,
and everybody started sitting me information.
Speaker 1: Thank you all. But I do that all the time.
Speaker 2: If I'm on the air and I need something right quick,
I just shout it out and everybody gets to me
right away with the data. So this fourteenth Congressional District
here in California, Eric Swalwell's former seat, that race is
still too close to call. We are told that there
are only sixty two percent of the votes that have
been counted. And so the race at the moment again
stay Senator Aisha Wahab is backed by the Democratic Party.
She leads the race at the moment fifty one to
forty nine percent over Melissa Hernandez, who is supported by
a Pax Main super pac. So here you have another
race at the moment. Stay with me, I'm gonna I'm
gonna connect some dots here, or if my preacher says, stay.
Speaker 1: Withhi me, I'm going somewhere with this I'm going somewhere
with this.
Speaker 2: I want to connect these two things up in a second. So,
in this race of game to replace Eric Swalwell in
Congress fourteen Congression of dis Security in California, his campaign
imploded while running for governor, Senator Stay Senator Aisha Wahab
is backed again by the Democratic Party. She sits right
now in fifty one percent, and Melissa Hernandez, supported by
APAX Main super Pac, is trailing at forty nine percent.
We shall see how this all works out. Now, let
me connect these dots. As I said a moment ago,
I was reading a story today before coming on the
air in the La Pergrim. Let me just read a
couple of paragraphs if I can of this story, and
then I'll get Justin's.
Speaker 1: View on what I want to share here.
Speaker 2: So the headline in the Li Progressive for this article reads,
a PAC money meets changing Electric In twenty twenty six midterms,
the Iran war, US support for Israel, and soaring campaign
spending are colliding with voters growing anxiety about gasoline, groceries
and the cost of living.
Speaker 1: I could go on. I think you take the point
of the article.
Speaker 2: This APAC money, they've been spending money, you know, so fastidiously,
so aggressively in campaigns all across this country. APAC's been
pouring in money, pouring in money in their track record
up until now has been pretty good. But now I
they've hit the skids, and this money is not necessarily
doing the trick, as I just evidence in the story
I share with you about how this race to replace
Eric Swalwell is playing out. But there are other examples
too many to list right now that we've discussed on
this program during this primary season where the APAC money
did not necessarily make the difference. And so this article
is pointing out that this APAC money has finally met
a changing electric and that the Iran war and that
the US is support for Israel soaring campaign spending, as
I said, are colliding with voters growing anxiety about gasoline groceries,
the cost of living, everyday issues, pocketbook issues, kitchen table
issues that matter to them, so that the APAC money
is not having the impact that it once had.
Speaker 1: That's to set up justin take it and run with it.
Speaker 6: Yeah, I agree with that for the most part. I
mean what we saw in Michigan a couple of weeks
ago right where Abduel Sayid, I mean Hailey Stevens, his
primary opponent, had a ton of APAC money behind her.
I believe I don't have the status right in front
of me, but that he was outspent something like nine
to one, maybe even more.
Speaker 1: Than I got. I got it right here, I got
it right here.
Speaker 2: There was sixty million dollars in outside spending in that race.
That's just the outside, the outside spinning number. Sixty million
dollars in outside spending money all for Hailey Stevens and
abduce else I steel pulled that off.
Speaker 1: Please continue.
Speaker 5: Yeah, And.
Speaker 6: It does feel as if almost a candidate being backed
by a pack specifically, and a lot of that is
going to depend on the electorate itself, but that it
it backfires when you're seeing.
Speaker 5: That that that that candidate is backed by a pack.
Speaker 6: It's what you have is the fact that Israel, the
war in God, the Israel's involvement with our war and Iran,
all of that, just the state of Israel itself has
become extremely unpopular here in the United States, specifically among
Democratic voters. So when APAX involved, and and we'll say
will point out that APEX spending almost all the time
with their super PACs are not bringing up Israel as
an actual issue. When they're they're doing the ads for
these for their candidates, it's usually just negative ads on
the other candidate. But it ends up the you know,
the electorates pretty spart and they can see who's who's
paying for this, even if it's not saying specifically.
Speaker 5: By APAX it and I'm getting reported.
Speaker 6: But when you're seeing all these negative ads, you're like, well,
why are they spending so much against that specific candidate?
And then you see that as a pack and you're like,
there's a reason for all that outside spending, and it
it tends the back part, but not always.
Speaker 5: Now, I haven't looked.
Speaker 6: At, you know, Angie Nixon and Alexander Vidman in terms
of what the spending is there, I mean, in terms
of how APAC played there. My belief there was that
Angie Nixon was just somebody that Florida Democrats, the normal
Florida Democrats, understood who she was. Felt like she was
an actual Floridian and buddy who had gained fame somehow
somewhere else and was part of what you would just
call resistance one point zero and they just rejected Alexander
Vitman in that style of democratic politics.
Speaker 5: Despite the huge spending.
Speaker 1: She was she was on she was on this program.
Speaker 2: Any Nixon was on this program on primary day as
a matter of fact, or maybe the advance of primary day.
I can't recall exactly what day she was on, but
she was on this program a few days ago.
Speaker 1: Uh, and you know, talked about that.
Speaker 2: So she was wildly outspent in that in that particular race,
and there was a PAC money in that particular race.
I don't have the exact numbers either, uh, but here again,
Angie Nixon is another example in this primary season of
people who beat back that a PAC money and won
these races anyway. And so again the money that APAC
has been spending is not having the impact that it
once had. And I take Justin's point. When you see
these A pack ads, they never say Israel, It's it's
It's it is negative campaigning aimed at the person they're
trying to defeat for the reasons they want to defeat them,
but they never there's no truth in advertising, if I
can use that phrase, there's no truth in advertising when
you see an APAC commercial. So again I think people
have figured it out, and they know what they're seeing
when they see it, whether or not it says brought
to you by a pack, whether it mentions Israel or not.
People have started to figure this out. But again they
got long money, but the victories are not coming as
easily as they used to. When we come forward to
that question that I posed, a moment agoe that we
ain't really tackled yet, which is how all of this,
how these progressive wins, how these DSA wins are shaping
the primary season that we are now in. But even
more so, if this trend I repeat continues, If this
trajectory continues, what is what we are seeing right now
say about the cons of folk who ought to stay
home in twenty twenty eight. If this trend continues and
you are one of those mainstream establishment democrats, shouldn't you
just not even fil papers. We'll talk about that when
we come forward on Tavis I's find justin Bergona as
the Tales media columnists. So we've been talking here for
a little bit now about the way this primary season
is shaped up. This was yet another week of primaries
in where Alaska and Florida and other places around the country.
So these Tuesday primaries are I don't think we're quite
done yet, we're getting here. Matter of fact, I need
to look at a calendar and see when we will
be through the entire primary cycle, uh.
Speaker 1: In this particular season.
Speaker 2: But it seems that every other Tuesday we're spending the
day talking about races and states all across the country.
And so we are seeing the way this thing is
taking shape. And so the question, justin is how these
progressive wins, how these DSA wins, to your mind, are
shaping our politics moving forward.
Speaker 6: Uh.
Speaker 5: Well, I would also say that.
Speaker 6: Some of these people, some of the progressives that are winning,
aren't necessarily DSA, but they get like DSA adjacent or
they get associated with it, like Abduell's yet actually is
on DSA exactly. But you know, to to you know,
the Fox News is of the world that it doesn't matter,
they're all gonna get painted with that brush. But uh,
and obviously, you know, both mainstream media and conservative press
are are trying to.
Speaker 5: You know, use ds A as like a maejorative here.
I've noticed that a lot on CNN as well, But
you know.
Speaker 6: Getting past that, uh, just saying I would say, going
with the overall you know, progressive candidate wins here, what
does it say, Yeah, I'd say after the you know,
after we get to the mid terms, we'll see how
those candidates fare in comparison with you know, more mainstream candidates.
Speaker 5: Uh say abdu Wels.
Speaker 6: Right, he's going to be you know, in that Senate race,
uh for you know, against Mike Rogers. If he wins,
but he wins in more of a like a nail bitter,
you know, will that be used, as you know, a
way for mainstream Democrats in the overall political press to say, look,
you know, progressivism and the DSA style candidates are they
are an anchor on the Democrats here going forward. But
if he were to win by the same margin or
a larger margin against Rogers, who is a well known
candidate there in Michigan, somebody who served as a congressman
before in his run for higher office there recently, then
it kind of it takes that narrative away from them.
But you know, to your point, what does that say
for twenty twenty eight?
Speaker 5: Right?
Speaker 2: Oh, that thought We'll talk about twenty twenty eight when
we come forward on Tavis Smile, You're Indeed, I'll put
this same questionnaire dot twenty l West in about five
minutes at the top of the second hour.
Speaker 1: Not the wish ran for president as an independent.
Speaker 2: I'm curious as to what this moment, this primary season
says to him about the kind of person that ought
to stay home and the kind of folks that need
to show up in twenty twenty eight. We'll let doctor
West opine on that in just a few moments. I
got two minutes left here just to Mike quick for you.
What's your read of what this primary season is for
is for telling about what twenty twenty eight ought.
Speaker 1: To look like.
Speaker 6: Well, I think first off on my mind here is
that Gavin Newsom should not run. I know he will,
but everything I've seen is that he just keeps falling
in voters' perspectives, and whether it's polls or prediction markets
or any of that, it just seems that there's not
going to be an appetite for.
Speaker 5: Somebody who's made that kind of name in politics.
Speaker 6: And I'll be you know, as much as Gavin could
probably portray himself as a progressive, I don't think that
there's going to be any appetite for him.
Speaker 5: Running.
Speaker 6: Same with folks that like Ram Emmanuel, probably Josh Shapiro
in Pennsylvania. These are ones that their names have been floated.
I just don't think that there's going to be any
appetite there. Same with you know, Kamala I don't think
even though she might be the presumptive favor going in,
you know, the thought is going to be that you know,
she lost, and even if it's not totally you know,
on her, because she was thrust into it late, there's
not going to be that appetite to have somebody that
represents the previous administration that lost the White House back
to the Trump to.
Speaker 5: Represent the Democrats in twenty twenty eight.
Speaker 6: I do think it'll be somebody, you know, like an
AOC that'll end up grabbing onto that nomination.
Speaker 5: Uh.
Speaker 6: We've seen a lot of movement from John Ostoff lately,
who seems to understand the style of aggressive politics whilst
still portraying himself as a thoughtful person.
Speaker 1: It's gonna, no, I think, are the ones. No, it's
gonna be fascinating, fascinating campaign.
Speaker 5: Uh.
Speaker 2: We gotta get past these mid terms first come November, Uh,
and see what the impact is, see whether or not
these DSA and progressive candidates can actually win in November.
The jury is still out on that. But once we
get past that, but I think I think the die
is set. The die has been cast rather uh, and
the frame is set. What people are interested in, what
they are looking for. They want fighters, they want progressives.
Speaker 4: Uh.
Speaker 2: And we'll talk about that, Doctor Cornell Western. We come
forward here on Tavis Smiley.
Speaker 1: Thank you, Justin