Speaker 1: Welcome to Pod Save America. I'm Jon Favreau. Today I'm
Speaker 1: joined by my old friend and colleague David Plouffe, the
Speaker 1: former White House senior advisor to Barack Obama and as
Speaker 1: well as his 2008 campaign manager and a senior advisor
Speaker 1: to Kamala Harris's 107-day campaign. Plouffe's one of the smartest
Speaker 1: and most committed people I've ever met in Democratic politics.
Speaker 1: So when I saw that he published a piece in
Speaker 1: The New York Times about the Democratic Party's new early
Speaker 1: state calendar and how he thinks it will fundamentally reshape
Speaker 1: the 2028 primary, I had a million questions I wanted
Speaker 1: to ask him. I first got his thoughts on the
Speaker 1: final stretch of the 2026 midterms and what he thinks
Speaker 1: Democrats need to do to close the deal with voters
Speaker 1: and all the key states and races. And then we
Speaker 1: dug into the 2028 primary, which, believe it or not,
Speaker 1: will basically begin the day after the midterms are over.
Speaker 1: We talked about the calendar, strategy, and he had some
Speaker 1: interesting things to say about some of the potential candidates
Speaker 1: like AOC, John Ossoff, and Kamala Harris. It was, as
Speaker 1: it always is with Pluff, a great conversation that I
Speaker 1: could have kept going for hours. We'll get to it
Speaker 1: in a minute, but before we do, please consider becoming
Speaker 1: a paying subscriber to Friends of the Pod. Subscribers get
Speaker 1: access to ad-free episodes of this show, Pod Save America,
Speaker 1: and all of your favorite Crooked Pods, as well as
Speaker 1: special subscriber-exclusive shows like our extra episode of Pod Save America,
Speaker 1: Pod Save America Only Friends, where this week Lovett and
Speaker 1: Dan broke down Darlene Graham's win in South Carolina and
Speaker 1: lots more. If you want to check it out and
Speaker 1: get access to even more newsletters, discounted CrookedCon tickets, all
Speaker 1: kinds of good stuff, head on over to crooked.com slash
Speaker 1: friends to subscribe. All right, here's David Plouffe. David Plouffe,
Speaker 1: welcome back to Pod Save America.
Speaker 2: Mr. Favreau, it's always good to be with you.
Speaker 1: You too. I looked at last time you were on
Speaker 1: was January and you and Pfeiffer talked about the Democratic brand,
Speaker 1: which has now been completely rehabilitated. But I was going
Speaker 1: to ask like, Now that the first ballots are set
Speaker 1: to go out next week, how much progress do you
Speaker 1: think the party has made over the last seven months
Speaker 1: in trying to fix some of the problems you and
Speaker 1: Dan talked about, you've written about? Put it another way,
Speaker 1: like how much of the Democrats' relatively strong political position
Speaker 1: right now would you say is attributable to Donald Trump's
Speaker 1: incredibly weak political position and how much is the party's
Speaker 1: actually done some improvement?
Speaker 2: I think all of it almost is attributable. to Donald
Speaker 2: Trump and the fact that they're in power. So listen,
Speaker 2: there is, to be an optimist for a minute, we've
Speaker 2: got some great candidates out there that I think are
Speaker 2: kind of defining for people in their own way what
Speaker 2: a Democrat can be in 2026. So that's great. But
Speaker 2: the party writ large, obviously, you just look at the numbers.
Speaker 2: I mean, we have, you know, we've got a massive problem.
Speaker 2: And listen, I don't know yet, neither do you, no
Speaker 2: one can know for sure what's going to happen this November. But,
Speaker 2: you know, it could be more like 2006, potentially atmospherically.
Speaker 2: And so the question is, are we going to take
Speaker 2: full advantage of that? We would take more advantage of
Speaker 2: it if our brand was stronger. But I think what
Speaker 2: we're going to see is candidates in certain places have
Speaker 2: begun to show us the way forward here about what
Speaker 2: a Democratic offering can be in 2026. So and that's
Speaker 2: going to be the important thing to look at is
Speaker 2: when we see after the election and look at the data,
Speaker 2: the Democrats who overperform kind of the mean are Even
Speaker 2: though this should be a fairly good year for us,
Speaker 2: we're going to have people overperform that. And to understand
Speaker 2: why is going to be really important going forward.
Speaker 1: So I know to a large extent this depends on
Speaker 1: the race, but what do you think the frontline House
Speaker 1: and Senate candidates in the most competitive races have to
Speaker 1: do in the next 60-ish days that they haven't done
Speaker 1: yet to close the deal with voters?
Speaker 2: Well, I think in most of these races, you're going
Speaker 2: to have five, six, seven percent of people who are
Speaker 2: still undecided. So you've got to make the case to them.
Speaker 2: And I think what's interesting is I think the case
Speaker 2: against the Republicans is largely set in stone. You've got
Speaker 2: to continue to remind people of this and particularly for
Speaker 2: some of these incumbent House Republicans and incumbent Senate Republicans,
Speaker 2: make sure they own all the downside of Trump. You've
Speaker 2: got to tie them to higher prices and health care
Speaker 2: and all the things people obviously are very upset about.
Speaker 2: But I think the candidates I think will do the
Speaker 2: best are able to convince people that they are not
Speaker 2: just a flawed alternative, that there's actually something that they
Speaker 2: offer that might be interesting and new and exciting to people.
Speaker 2: Then you've got to focus on turnout and make sure
Speaker 2: that we're getting strong enough turnout. And I think in
Speaker 2: the red states, particularly in center races, but this is
Speaker 2: true in some of the outer edge house races, you know,
Speaker 2: we all see the polls. Maybe they're all bullshit, but
Speaker 2: let's say they're accurate. And, you know, we've got people
Speaker 2: in states like Iowa, in Texas, in Alaska, you know,
Speaker 2: who are winning, but they're still at like 46, 47, 48.
Speaker 2: And I always remind people, like when we see a
Speaker 2: poll that has a Democrat at 47 and a Republican
Speaker 2: at 42, yeah, it's better than the alternative, but that's
Speaker 2: 89% of the vote. What's happening to the other 11%?
Speaker 2: And so for these candidates, you have to focus on that.
Speaker 2: And the good ones know this, which is, let's say
Speaker 2: in that scenario, most of that 11% is going to
Speaker 2: go to the Republicans. in some of these tough places.
Speaker 2: So you've got to figure out where's the 3% of
Speaker 2: that 11% that's out there that I can bring home.
Speaker 2: So that really is the focus, I think, of all
Speaker 2: of these candidates is, and I think it's going to
Speaker 2: require in some of the toughest districts and toughest Senate states,
Speaker 2: it can't just be anti-Republican vote. That is why we're
Speaker 2: in the position we're in, and it's a great position. But,
Speaker 2: and this is where like a James Tallarico, maybe we'll
Speaker 2: see this with an Osborne in Nebraska, a Turek, these
Speaker 2: candidates who are exceptional candidates. you know, have the ability
Speaker 2: to get that extra one or two percent because of
Speaker 2: who they are, not just because they're a Democrat.
Speaker 1: Yeah, this kind of leads to my next question, which
Speaker 1: is I saw this week Troy Jackson released his first ads.
Speaker 1: They were like positive bio spots. Abdul El-Sayed mixed it
Speaker 1: up with Jesse Waters on Fox. I saw some people say,
Speaker 1: you know, these candidates shouldn't do all that much to
Speaker 1: make the race about them. Everything should be about trying
Speaker 1: to tie their opponents to Donald Trump. obviously, everyone has
Speaker 1: to do a little bit of both. But what is
Speaker 1: your sense of the right balance there?
Speaker 2: Well, I think sort of atmospherically, most of these Republican
Speaker 2: candidates are already paying the price for being in Donald
Speaker 2: Trump's party and for a lot of them doing his bidding. So,
Speaker 2: of course, over the next few weeks, and you're going
Speaker 2: to want to continue to remind people of that. And,
Speaker 2: you know, the most interesting way to do that, I think,
Speaker 2: is to bring forward voters and voices who can speak
Speaker 2: to that. Particularly people who said, listen, I voted for
Speaker 2: this person in the past, or I voted for Donald Trump.
Speaker 2: I can't do it anymore. I've switched. But I think
Speaker 2: to get, again, I'm very focused on states where, and
Speaker 2: in the Senate in particular, you know, this is hostile
Speaker 2: political territory for us. So I do think you've got
Speaker 2: to give people comfort that you're an alternative that they
Speaker 2: can trust. So it's a blend. But I think it's
Speaker 2: always important in campaigns, John, and you know this very well, like,
Speaker 2: You've got to step back and say, what's the thing
Speaker 2: that voters already know? And so then how do we
Speaker 2: reinforce that? But where's the opening where we can introduce
Speaker 2: new arguments? Some of those may be new ways to,
Speaker 2: you know, refresh the argument against Republicans. But I think
Speaker 2: Democrats have to. And so when I see Jackson and
Speaker 2: Abdul Al-Sayed and Turek and Rob Sander and all these people,
Speaker 2: you know, going into hostile places to do interviews, that's
Speaker 2: what you have to do. I really, really believe that's
Speaker 2: the case because we're at a point now where anybody
Speaker 2: who's truly undecided about who to vote for, whether to vote,
Speaker 2: it's kind of already baked in that they're very unhappy
Speaker 2: with Donald Trump and the Republicans. So I'm not suggesting
Speaker 2: you don't continue to remind them that, but that's just
Speaker 2: a fact. And again, I think when we look post-election,
Speaker 2: the people who overperformed the average Democrat are going to
Speaker 2: be people who built a relationship with their voters based
Speaker 2: on who they are, what they're offering. And by the way,
Speaker 2: particularly where they're different from not just Republicans, but the
Speaker 2: Democratic Party and the status quo. Those are the candidates
Speaker 2: that I think they're going to do the best this November.
Speaker 1: Well, I've been thinking about this because it's tough for
Speaker 1: these congressional candidates, at least, to really run on much
Speaker 1: of a positive agenda when Donald Trump is going to
Speaker 1: be president for another two years because You don't want
Speaker 1: to get into the situation where you overpromise something that
Speaker 1: you just– people know that you're not going to be
Speaker 1: able to deliver. But like– and obviously the party hasn't–
Speaker 1: and maybe that will change, but I don't think so.
Speaker 1: There's been no sort of contract with America or even–
Speaker 1: I feel like in 06 there was like an anti-corruption agenda.
Speaker 1: What do you think about that? Like is it just
Speaker 1: race by race and people talking about individual things that
Speaker 1: they can do either in the next two years or
Speaker 1: beyond that? Or how does that work?
Speaker 2: I think it's very individualized. So I think a national, listen,
Speaker 2: I think national Democrats should go on a cruise somewhere
Speaker 2: where there's no cell service and no ability to do
Speaker 2: interviews and let the candidates take the stage. And by
Speaker 2: the way, listen, if you look historically, I mean, the
Speaker 2: contract for America actually, you know, as you know, we've
Speaker 2: been through this. When you win, you get to say
Speaker 2: why you won. And when you lose, obviously everything sticks
Speaker 2: to you. But the contract with America was not why
Speaker 2: they won. I mean, the exit polls back in 94
Speaker 2: suggested that it was not a core reason that people voted.
Speaker 2: And the six for six, I think that's what it
Speaker 2: was called in 06. Like, that's not why Democrats won.
Speaker 2: So I just think at the end of the day,
Speaker 2: we should give, particularly when you've got a brand problem
Speaker 2: as acute as we do, let's just give the individual
Speaker 2: candidates or like small businesses, you know, let them do
Speaker 2: what they think is best. Some of them may have
Speaker 2: very specific policy agenda. Some of them may focus on corruption.
Speaker 2: Some of them may be more about their biography and
Speaker 2: kind of their values. So let them do their thing
Speaker 2: because the overhang of the party, like, so right now,
Speaker 2: like to have Chuck Schumer and Democrats out on the
Speaker 2: steps saying, here's what we're going to do when we
Speaker 2: gain power, that would be political malpractice of like historical proportions.
Speaker 2: So I think we should just, that's my view anyway.
Speaker 2: I think, and it particularly when We do have, not universally,
Speaker 2: but there are some really strong candidates for the Senate
Speaker 2: and for the House running who I think are, again,
Speaker 2: showing us what a new version of Democratic offering can be.
Speaker 2: That's quite exciting. And I think their biggest challenge right
Speaker 2: now is the Democratic Party brand. So let's not do
Speaker 2: anything to make that more complicated for them.
Speaker 1: What are some of the biggest unforced errors that Democrats
Speaker 1: could make in the next 60 days that worry you?
Speaker 2: Well, I think it is. You know, I don't think
Speaker 2: there's going to be a national agenda, but a national agenda.
Speaker 2: I think having a lot of discussion about the hearings
Speaker 2: that we're going to have when we take over would
Speaker 2: be problematical. And I this can sound like I'm kidding.
Speaker 2: I'm not like I just think national Democrats should go
Speaker 2: in hiding and let these individual candidates prosecute their case.
Speaker 2: And by the way, that's important because we know Donald
Speaker 2: Trump's not going to go into hiding. Right. So he's
Speaker 2: going to continue to be out there. He's going to cause...
Speaker 2: By the way, this ad campaign he's talking about running
Speaker 2: with all of his money, that's going to be pro-Trump ads.
Speaker 2: Phenomenally stupid. I think, although, John, you should always step
Speaker 2: back and say, is there something they see that maybe
Speaker 2: we don't see? And the only thing I can think
Speaker 2: about is it may help them with turnout a little bit.
Speaker 2: But all those candidates now are going to have to
Speaker 2: answer to Donald Trump running ads... on all the things
Speaker 2: that are upsetting voters in their states and districts. So
Speaker 2: that's the other thing I think about it. Like, let
Speaker 2: him kind of dominate nationally. Let's make sure we're quiet nationally.
Speaker 2: And let's let some of these great candidates have the
Speaker 2: best environment we can imagine in these closing weeks. And
Speaker 2: as you know, people start voting in about five to
Speaker 2: six weeks. So this isn't a two-month question.
Speaker 1: Well, on the Dem side, like, the discourse and the coverage,
Speaker 1: I think, has been dominated for the last couple weeks,
Speaker 1: months about this, like, And this is partly because of
Speaker 1: the primaries and partly because of Republicans. This like DSA
Speaker 1: left versus center left establishment narrative. Like how much do
Speaker 1: you think that or how much do you worry that
Speaker 1: that might affect the outcome of the midterms? Or is
Speaker 1: this just an insider thing that most voters are never
Speaker 1: going to really pay attention to?
Speaker 2: My view, and it's based a little bit on research
Speaker 2: I've seen, but also instinct, is it's very much the latter.
Speaker 2: Like the people that will decide the Iowa governor's race
Speaker 2: and the Iowa Senate race in Clinton, Iowa, or in Decorah, Iowa,
Speaker 2: you think they're talking about this democratic divide or in Toledo, Ohio?
Speaker 2: Absolutely not. And so in those states, you've got Amy Acton,
Speaker 2: you've got Sherrod Brown, you've got Turek, you've got Sand,
Speaker 2: just to use those examples. who are defining what the
Speaker 2: Democratic offering is in this election. They're not focused on
Speaker 2: what happened in those states, even though Michigan's close to them,
Speaker 2: like what happened in the Michigan primary, what's happening in
Speaker 2: New York City. They're just not focused on that. Now,
Speaker 2: I think our presidential race, not in the general election,
Speaker 2: but in the primary, yeah, that's going to be a
Speaker 2: really big piece of it, is what are people looking for?
Speaker 2: And I happen to believe it'll probably be more about
Speaker 2: the person, their biography, their values, their performance than ideology.
Speaker 2: but that'll be part of it. So I really do
Speaker 2: not think, and by the way, if the Republicans want
Speaker 2: to go spend a bunch of time saying, well, what
Speaker 2: you're really electing is democratic socialists, have at it. Because
Speaker 2: I don't think that blanket message to me works at all.
Speaker 2: I think the best thing they can do is try
Speaker 2: and indict the individual Democrats running in states or districts
Speaker 2: to the best of their ability. But I think there's
Speaker 2: going to be a limitation to that as well, because listen,
Speaker 2: people are really fucking upset out there and they are
Speaker 2: ready to to switch, even though they don't like their
Speaker 2: option to switch to. They like some of the individual Democrats,
Speaker 2: not the Democratic Party. And so for me, this is
Speaker 2: the challenge for us over the next number of years
Speaker 2: and even decade, is we have to get that brand
Speaker 2: stronger so that we reliably win more elections in more
Speaker 2: places so that we can have sustained power and control
Speaker 2: the White House and the Senate. This is existential. And
Speaker 2: whatever happens in this election, we should not think Or
Speaker 2: get overly confident that we fixed our problems because we haven't.
Speaker 1: Yeah. No, that's going to be important because clearly the
Speaker 1: Biden folks thought that in 22 because the midterms were
Speaker 1: better than expected. Any long shot races in the midterms
Speaker 1: you think that would it be worth investing more in
Speaker 1: right now that people should have their eye on?
Speaker 2: Well, the question would be, I mean, you you were
Speaker 2: I mean, you were in Obama's Senate office in 2006, right?
Speaker 1: Mm hmm.
Speaker 2: Okay. And, you know, I was very involved in that election,
Speaker 2: did a lot of work for Rahm in the DCCC. And,
Speaker 2: you know, that was the election where there were people
Speaker 2: who won an election.
Speaker 1: I remember.
Speaker 2: That the DCCC hadn't supported. That surprised the heck out
Speaker 2: of everybody. So is that possible this time? I think
Speaker 2: it's probably less possible in the House just because there
Speaker 2: are so few real competitive districts. But, you know, is
Speaker 2: it possible that we could win some House races that
Speaker 2: Trump won by 12, 14 points? I guess it's possible.
Speaker 2: I think the surprises will be in the Senate.
Speaker 1: Mm-hmm.
Speaker 2: What's so exciting about the Senate, now, Senate control is
Speaker 2: going to be really hard because this is hostile territory,
Speaker 2: but boy, we're taking a lot of shots on goal
Speaker 2: this year. We've got a lot of races. We can
Speaker 2: lose most of them and still win. The question is,
Speaker 2: in South Dakota, in Montana, in Nebraska, are there going
Speaker 2: to be some surprises? Those would be like, if we
Speaker 2: win any of those, we're going to have a year
Speaker 2: probably as good as 2006. But you know, Alaska, Iowa, Ohio.
Speaker 2: By the way, we're now used to saying how competitive
Speaker 2: like Iowa is and Ohio is. I mean, these are
Speaker 2: deep red states right now.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: And so, you know, let's not forget that, you know,
Speaker 2: particularly like if Sherrod Brown wins, having just lost, I mean,
Speaker 2: you know, that's going to be 10 to 12 percent
Speaker 2: of the electorate behaving completely differently from 24 to 26.
Speaker 2: So I think there could be some Senate race surprises.
Speaker 2: And again, I think that the people who might pull
Speaker 2: those races off, they might have just got 48% in
Speaker 2: this good environment for Democrats. It's because enough voters said,
Speaker 2: they're a different kind of Democrat, or that's a person
Speaker 2: I can trust, or that I'm excited or interested in
Speaker 2: that person. And that's where I think the surprises will
Speaker 2: come from.
Speaker 3: Pot Save America is brought to you by Z Biotics Pre-Alcohol.
Speaker 3: I want to tell you guys about a new game-changing
Speaker 3: product I use before any night out with drinks. It's
Speaker 3: called Pre-Alcohol by Z Biotics. Z Biotics Pre-Alcohol Probiotic Drink
Speaker 3: is the world's first genetically engineered probiotic. It was invented
Speaker 3: by PhD scientists to break down acetaldehyde, which I can't pronounce,
Speaker 3: but it doesn't matter.
Speaker 1: Yeah, because it's broken down already.
Speaker 3: You don't like it either. It's a byproduct of drinking alcohol.
Speaker 3: Pre-Alcohol produces an enzyme that is designed... break down this
Speaker 3: byproduct that we can't pronounce. What you do is you
Speaker 3: make pre-alcohol your first drink of the night, you drink
Speaker 3: responsibly enough, and then you enjoy your next day. ZBiotics
Speaker 3: has sold more than 14 million bottles, wow, and earned
Speaker 3: the trust of thousands, including us. I literally will not
Speaker 3: have a drink without a ZBiotics. It is a game
Speaker 3: changer for me. As you all know, as you get older,
Speaker 3: your body does not do as good a job digesting alcohol,
Speaker 3: which means A very calm, casual night out can punish
Speaker 3: you the next day. ZBiotics has solved that problem for me.
Speaker 3: I cannot recommend it enough.
Speaker 1: Give it a shot.
Speaker 3: Try for yourself today, and if you're unsatisfied, they'll refund
Speaker 3: your entire order. No questions asked. Head to zbiotics.com slash crooked.
Speaker 3: Code crooked for 15% off your first order. That's zbiotics.com
Speaker 3: slash crooked. Code crooked for 15% off.
Speaker 1: Pod Save America is brought to you by HIMSS. ED
Speaker 1: is more common than guys talk about. The good news,
Speaker 1: getting real treatment is simple, and through HIMSS, it's 100% online.
Speaker 1: HIMSS connects you with licensed healthcare providers online, giving you
Speaker 1: simple access to legitimate ED treatment options from home. No
Speaker 1: awkward appointments, no pharmacy lines. Just complete a simple online
Speaker 1: intake and a provider will review your information to determine
Speaker 1: if treatment is right for you. If prescribed, your treatment
Speaker 1: ships directly to your door. That includes Sidenafil, also known
Speaker 1: as generic for Viagra, available through HIMSS at up to
Speaker 1: 95% less than the brand name version. And if that
Speaker 1: option isn't right for you, there are additional treatment options
Speaker 1: available so you can find what works best for your body.
Speaker 1: It's straightforward, transparent, and designed to make getting care feel easy.
Speaker 1: To get simple online access to personalized, affordable care for
Speaker 1: ED and more, visit HIMS.com slash crooked. That's H-I-M-S dot
Speaker 1: com slash crooked. HIMS.com slash crooked. Not available in all
Speaker 1: 50 states. Prescription required. See website for details, restrictions, and
Speaker 1: important safety information. Sildenafil is the generic version of Viagra.
Speaker 1: Viagra is a registered trademark of Vietris Specialty LLC. HIMS
Speaker 1: is not affiliated with or endorsed by Vietris.
Speaker 2: All right.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about, uh, the 2028 primary, uh, which basically
Speaker 1: begins the day after the midterms. Uh, when people ask
Speaker 1: me what I think about 2028, I always say it's,
Speaker 1: it's really hard to know anything until we know who
Speaker 1: the candidates are and the order of the early States.
Speaker 1: So now we know the calendar, South Carolina, Nevada, New Hampshire,
Speaker 1: New Mexico, Michigan, Virginia. Uh, and you just wrote a
Speaker 1: New York times piece about this. Um, You called it
Speaker 1: the most consequential primary shakeup in decades. I feel like
Speaker 1: you could have written another 5,000 words on this, which
Speaker 1: is why I wanted to.
Speaker 2: Have you on. I did, but they cut them out.
Speaker 1: I figured.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I could tell.
Speaker 1: But like big picture, when you sit down to plan
Speaker 1: your presidential campaign, if you're one of these candidates, what
Speaker 1: are the most important differences to consider between the old
Speaker 1: map and the new map?
Speaker 2: Well, first of all, if you'll grant me this, I
Speaker 2: hope they spend a lot of time thinking about whether
Speaker 2: they should fucking run or not.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Like.
Speaker 1: No, I... Like.
Speaker 2: Like... Do I have something so unique to offer my
Speaker 2: party in the country that I should seek our nomination
Speaker 2: and I would want to be our president? Like, I
Speaker 2: know it all seems like a reality show now. You
Speaker 2: and I have worked in that building. You know how
Speaker 2: hard the decisions these presidents have to make are like.
Speaker 2: So let's start there. But let's assume they look in
Speaker 2: the mirror and they say yes and they decide to run.
Speaker 2: You know, you're going to have to have a message and,
Speaker 2: you know, Even though we have states now, so you
Speaker 2: just mentioned the six, that'll be most important. You know,
Speaker 2: this is still a national campaign. There's no borders around content.
Speaker 2: There's no borders around controversy. So, you know, you don't
Speaker 2: want to fashion your strategy and your message based on states.
Speaker 2: But as you think about this, like if you're not
Speaker 2: in the top three in the first state, so in
Speaker 2: this case, South Carolina, you're probably done. Let's say the
Speaker 2: winner is, let's just say Kamala Harris runs and let's
Speaker 2: say Kamala Harris wins South Carolina. Her challenge will be,
Speaker 2: does she exit Virginia with the same strength of black
Speaker 2: voters that she started the process in South Carolina? And
Speaker 2: somebody else has to figure out, how am I going
Speaker 2: to grow so that I can exit really Michigan and
Speaker 2: Virginia as the leader? Because as you know, John, having
Speaker 2: gone through this, right after Virginia, we get into Super
Speaker 2: Tuesday and massive states with huge delegate yield. And the
Speaker 2: reason the black vote is so important in the democratic
Speaker 2: process is we apportion our delegates by congressional district for
Speaker 2: the most part. Some of them are statewide. And those,
Speaker 2: the most democratic congressional districts have more delegates. And if
Speaker 2: you're the candidate who's winning 50, 60, 70% of the
Speaker 2: black vote, you're winning congressional districts and winning those delegates.
Speaker 2: Like let's say it's a CD with eight delegates, you
Speaker 2: could win seven. And if you're winning all of them
Speaker 2: throughout the South, you're the nominee. So I think the
Speaker 2: question is for all these people, Um, you know, how
Speaker 2: do I survive South Carolina? Um, how do I, if
Speaker 2: I didn't win South Carolina, how do I win Nevada
Speaker 2: or finish a stronger second than I did in South Carolina?
Speaker 2: New Hampshire, if it stays there, um, is interesting. You know,
Speaker 2: you could see a Canada Lake Buddha judge if he runs,
Speaker 2: you know, not winning South Carolina of data doing well
Speaker 2: enough winning New Hampshire. So then the question for him
Speaker 2: is in New Mexico, in Michigan and in Virginia, can
Speaker 2: he expand his coalition? Um, And even though, you know,
Speaker 2: Virginia's got almost 30 percent of the electorate there is
Speaker 2: going to be black voters. So we start with a
Speaker 2: state that's going to be dominated and really determined by
Speaker 2: how the black vote allocates its vote. And we end
Speaker 2: it with a state where the black vote is going
Speaker 2: to be incredibly important.
Speaker 1: So, you know, Michigan, Michigan, too, I guess, Michigan, too.
Speaker 2: You've got, you know, heavy black vote in Michigan. Obviously,
Speaker 2: you've got some important Arab American vote, big campuses. So,
Speaker 2: you know, I guess my my view on it is.
Speaker 2: You can't right now, any of the candidates say, well, okay,
Speaker 2: how am I going to win the black vote? Well,
Speaker 2: you're going to win the black vote by running a
Speaker 2: great campaign, by being an exciting candidate, by building support
Speaker 2: in that community. There's no way to like X or
Speaker 2: O your way to this. It's not like it was
Speaker 2: back when like John Kerry ran in 04, where you're like, oh,
Speaker 2: I've got 12 state senators in a state who've endorsed me.
Speaker 2: And that doesn't matter anymore, really. I mean, with the
Speaker 2: exception of maybe Jim Clyburn, there's no endorsement that's going
Speaker 2: to actually generate vote. So I think the key thing
Speaker 2: for these candidates in these campaigns is, They're basically running
Speaker 2: six governor's races in these six primary states. And, you know,
Speaker 2: you have no chance if you don't exit Virginia either
Speaker 2: as well. If you don't exit Virginia as the front runner,
Speaker 2: you're probably cooked.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: Right. And you have to understand that. And each of
Speaker 2: those states obviously has some commonality with each other around issues,
Speaker 2: but they have distinction. And so you want to build
Speaker 2: a campaign to survive early and hopefully then build momentum
Speaker 2: and and exit Virginia into Super Tuesday with the ability
Speaker 2: to be the nominee. So, you know, at the end
Speaker 2: of the, and the reason I wrote that piece is, A,
Speaker 2: I find these calendar changes fascinating. I think they're very consequential,
Speaker 2: but this is the campaign. Debates are important and, you know,
Speaker 2: going viral is important and raising money is important, but
Speaker 2: that all that matters is this set of six states.
Speaker 2: And that is the presidential nomination process. process for us. Now,
Speaker 2: is it possible that we have two candidates of equal
Speaker 2: strength leaving Virginia? Maybe. But as we saw back in 2008,
Speaker 2: as close as that race was, we had a delegate advantage.
Speaker 2: So that's the other thing. Whoever exits Virginia with the
Speaker 2: most momentum will probably do best on Super Tuesday. They
Speaker 2: will then have a delegate advantage, which may not look huge,
Speaker 2: but even if it's 80 or 90 delegates, they'll never
Speaker 2: be caught. They're going to be our nominees.
Speaker 1: Well, I want to go through state by state just
Speaker 1: because it's fun to nerd out on this. On South Carolina,
Speaker 1: so I do think that's interesting. So there's the if
Speaker 1: Kamala runs, if she doesn't run. But if she does run,
Speaker 1: maybe you're planning your campaign. Maybe you're planning it to win,
Speaker 1: but you're trying to get two or three. Is it
Speaker 1: wrong for people to assume, because this is the conventional wisdom,
Speaker 1: that most black voters will ultimately vote for Kamala or
Speaker 1: other black candidates if they run? Or do you think,
Speaker 1: even in South Carolina... black vote's more up for grabs
Speaker 1: than people might think?
Speaker 2: I think it's totally up for grabs. I mean, if
Speaker 2: she runs, just she starts in such a dominating position. Now,
Speaker 2: of course, and this isn't a criticism from her, it's
Speaker 2: just the reality. Her strongest day will be her first
Speaker 2: day in the campaign. And then that support, she'll obviously
Speaker 2: try and hold onto it, but there'll be natural competition
Speaker 2: for it and there'll probably be some erosion. So no,
Speaker 2: I think it's a completely open question, even if she runs.
Speaker 2: And I think the other candidate's should not be trying
Speaker 2: to come in second or third. They should be trying
Speaker 2: to win. And if they don't and they come in
Speaker 2: second or third, then they may have the ability to continue.
Speaker 2: If she doesn't run, then I think black voters in
Speaker 2: South Carolina and everywhere else, clearly they're completely wide open.
Speaker 2: So no, I do not believe. I think older black
Speaker 2: voters in South Carolina will be like older white voters
Speaker 2: in the upper peninsula of Michigan and Latino voters in
Speaker 2: New Mexico and Nevada, they want to win back the
Speaker 2: White House. And so I think they're going to be
Speaker 2: very focused. And listen, I think the key thing here is,
Speaker 2: is this is an audition. It's a performance. I don't
Speaker 2: think this is how we should audition our next commander
Speaker 2: in chief, but it's all we've got. And so the
Speaker 2: thing I'm really looking for is who is showing the
Speaker 2: signs of of having the ability to communicate in a
Speaker 2: way that people are getting information today, that they're interesting,
Speaker 2: they get people talking about them. AOC clearly has that instinctively.
Speaker 2: I think Ossoff, at least on a speechmaking front, has that.
Speaker 2: So we'll see. But I think that that has become
Speaker 2: really important because, you know, it's not about giving interviews.
Speaker 2: It's not about giving speeches. They're still important. But the
Speaker 2: most important thing is, you know, this phone is the campaign. Yeah.
Speaker 2: And how are you utilizing it each and every day
Speaker 2: in interesting ways to reach tough-to-reach voters? And I think
Speaker 2: that that is something that I think is really going
Speaker 2: to be important to understand, which is you mentioned questions
Speaker 2: about ideology and races they might have run and won before.
Speaker 2: All of that's important. The most important thing is in
Speaker 2: this particular moment, in the fourth quarter of 27 and
Speaker 2: the first quarter of 28, how are they performing?
Speaker 1: The other thing I worried about– I wondered about in
Speaker 1: South Carolina because it will be the state where the
Speaker 1: most candidates are competing is– and of course we have
Speaker 1: to see the composition of the field. But the conventional
Speaker 1: wisdom and I think there's a lot of wisdom to
Speaker 1: this is that it is a more moderate electorate in
Speaker 1: South Carolina. It certainly seems that way. Older black voters,
Speaker 1: rural voters. But if there's that many candidates– You do
Speaker 1: wonder if there's only one or two like really progressive candidates,
Speaker 1: if they could do better than expected because so many
Speaker 1: of the center left candidates are splitting all the rest
Speaker 1: of the vote.
Speaker 2: We'll see. I mean, history would suggest that there's going
Speaker 2: to be a candidate who becomes the favorite for younger
Speaker 2: progressive voters.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: You know, if AOC were to run, I think it's
Speaker 2: going to be her. And then her question will be,
Speaker 2: how do I build from there? I mean, she'd probably
Speaker 2: start with a very enviable base if it's not her.
Speaker 2: then I think it's open question, right? And I don't
Speaker 2: see anybody out there right now that's kind of a
Speaker 2: natural place for 80, 90% of that cohort to land.
Speaker 2: So I think that's a great question, but I do
Speaker 2: think that South Carolina has never been first. It's always
Speaker 2: been the end of the calendar. It's the gateway to
Speaker 2: the rest of the country. So this time it's the
Speaker 2: first one. But it's a small enough state too where
Speaker 2: retail skills will matter. So, you know, that's part of
Speaker 2: performance too, by the way. And of course, if you
Speaker 2: have good engagement with voters in a diner or a
Speaker 2: bar or a farm, that turns into great content. So
Speaker 2: I do think that, you know, as you know, it's
Speaker 2: a decathlon and you don't have to be the best
Speaker 2: at every event, but you've got to be good enough
Speaker 2: at all of them to navigate this. I mean, it's interesting, John.
Speaker 2: I mean, I like you. I have a lot of
Speaker 2: friends who are data geeks and they'll say, well, the
Speaker 2: most important thing as we think about who we should
Speaker 2: nominate is, you know, basically who has the higher wins
Speaker 2: against replacement, you know, in their state. And I'm like, yes,
Speaker 2: that's important. That shows. But but this is a whole
Speaker 2: different beast now. I mean, the political graveyard is littered
Speaker 2: with people who looked on paper like they would be
Speaker 2: great presidential candidates. Most people can't survive it. It's a brutal,
Speaker 2: brutal process.
Speaker 1: I think also the delta between being governor of a state,
Speaker 1: probably a small state or big state, and being a
Speaker 1: national candidate and what's required to succeed at each has
Speaker 1: never been larger just because of the information environment.
Speaker 2: Totally. I agree with that.
Speaker 1: So I have a question about momentum, which is like
Speaker 1: the momentum you get Out of the early state primary wins,
Speaker 1: arguably more important than the delegates at that stage. Yes.
Speaker 1: Momentum is largely dependent on whether or not you beat
Speaker 1: expectations in a given state other than just outright winning.
Speaker 1: As a campaign, how do you even begin to set
Speaker 1: or manage expectations with a completely new calendar like this?
Speaker 1: You don't have reporters– With muscle memory of what these
Speaker 1: states did before and what it was like, like, what
Speaker 1: does that even look like to start setting expectations as
Speaker 1: a campaign?
Speaker 2: I think it's really hard to set expectations. They get
Speaker 2: set for you. Yeah. So even like regionally, I mean, let's,
Speaker 2: you know, if Bashir runs, he's going to be expected
Speaker 2: to do relatively well in South Carolina, fairly or unfairly.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Gavin Newsom, Mark Kelly. Yeah, right. Out West in Nevada,
Speaker 2: New Mexico. So there'll be regional expectations there. obviously there
Speaker 2: are expectations put on front runners or people who had
Speaker 2: strong pole positions. And if they underperform in the first
Speaker 2: couple of states, they'll pay an outsized price for that.
Speaker 2: So I think it's really hard for a candidate to
Speaker 2: set expectations. Now, I think when you're right before a contest,
Speaker 2: so maybe it's a week before South Carolina and a
Speaker 2: candidate doesn't think they're going to win South Carolina, but
Speaker 2: thinks they're going to come in second or third, they'll
Speaker 2: start talking about, well, that's exactly what we needed to
Speaker 2: go forward to Nevada. So there's expectations, I think, right
Speaker 2: before and after contests that can be important. But, you know,
Speaker 2: it's a free-for-all. So I think it's really going to
Speaker 2: be hard. And the point is, like, surviving a state
Speaker 2: is not the same as having a chance to win. So,
Speaker 2: you know, you know this historically. There'll be somebody, oh,
Speaker 2: how many tickets out of Iowa or New Hampshire? Yeah.
Speaker 2: People may be able to keep going so they can
Speaker 2: go to the next debate and not drop out, but
Speaker 2: they have no chance of winning. And so that's what
Speaker 2: really matters is when we get out of South Carolina,
Speaker 2: who's actually got a chance to be the nominee. And
Speaker 2: my guess is that most that would be three people.
Speaker 2: It could be two.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: And to your point about delegates, right. Although now, because
Speaker 2: some of these states are bigger and we have six states,
Speaker 2: I think maybe 10 percent of the delegates will be
Speaker 2: in the first six states. So if somebody were to
Speaker 2: somehow exit Virginia with 30 or 40 delegate lead, that's
Speaker 2: not immaterial. But I agree with you. The delegate story
Speaker 2: begins on Super Tuesday.
Speaker 1: So Nevada comes after South Carolina 10 days later. It
Speaker 1: is a primary for the first time, not a caucus.
Speaker 1: So completely new race, a lot more voters. What does
Speaker 1: that look like in Nevada with everyone? I assume everyone
Speaker 1: then is trying to take down the winner of South Carolina.
Speaker 2: Oh, God, yeah.
Speaker 1: It's going to be brutal, brutal 10 days. So that
Speaker 1: seems like– and I also think that the conventional wisdom
Speaker 1: there is it might be good for progressives. But I
Speaker 1: kind of think that's a view of what the caucus
Speaker 1: was like, right, where it's easier to organize and have
Speaker 1: highly engaged activists turn out at a caucus than it
Speaker 1: is a primary. And Nevada, the electorate there is– it's
Speaker 1: not super lefty when you get– when you're looking at
Speaker 1: the whole state, especially since this is a state now
Speaker 1: where they mail everyone a ballot.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: So I think it was a strong state for Bernie
Speaker 2: both times he ran. By the way, so was Michigan.
Speaker 2: So there are two states where I think if you
Speaker 2: are a progressive candidate, that gives you some, I think, comfort.
Speaker 2: But you're right. Nevada is a fascinating state. I mean,
Speaker 2: it's a very diverse state. A lot of people just
Speaker 2: moving into the state. So transient population, got heavy union population,
Speaker 2: obviously a large number of Latino voters. pretty significant number
Speaker 2: of black voters. You've got rural upstate. So it's going
Speaker 2: to be a test. And it's also like Nevada. So
Speaker 2: it's going to be an absolute freak show. Like those
Speaker 2: 10 days are going to be, I think, some of
Speaker 2: the most fascinating 10 days we've seen in American politics.
Speaker 2: So because you're right, whoever comes out of South Carolina
Speaker 2: with momentum, the challenge of the other candidates is to
Speaker 2: deny them that momentum in Nevada. So it's also a relatively...
Speaker 2: small state geographically and population wise. So you're, you're organizing
Speaker 2: matters there. You know, you're going to have a lot
Speaker 2: of probably first time registrants to go after there. So, so,
Speaker 2: so what's interesting is if the person who wins South
Speaker 2: Carolina and almost, almost, Not, I guess, guaranteed, but it's
Speaker 2: almost definite that person did really well with the black vote.
Speaker 2: The question is, in Nevada, are they basically able to
Speaker 2: get the same vote share with the black vote or
Speaker 2: maybe grow it? Are they doing well with the Latino vote?
Speaker 2: How are they doing with union vote? So it's going
Speaker 2: to be really interesting. And I think that the other
Speaker 2: candidates are obviously going to try and improve their vote
Speaker 2: share with black voters, but show that they've got the
Speaker 2: ability to do well with Latino voters. with union voters.
Speaker 2: By the way, you know, there's big suburbs, Henderson and
Speaker 2: places like that too. So a lot of suburban vote.
Speaker 2: So you may begin to learn something about that as
Speaker 2: it relates to Michigan suburbs and Albuquerque suburbs and Northern
Speaker 2: Virginia suburbs later in the calendar. Because by the way,
Speaker 2: what happens in the early states, you know, you can
Speaker 2: have sea change, but like I'll always remember, you know,
Speaker 2: back in 08, John, when we won Iowa, as great
Speaker 2: a night as that was, when you looked at the
Speaker 2: counties along the Missouri border, We were just getting our
Speaker 2: ass kicked.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Like Edwards and Clinton killed us. And that was, interestingly enough,
Speaker 2: even though the story was, you know, overwhelmingly white voters
Speaker 2: in Iowa chose Obama and they did. And it was
Speaker 2: a big part of how we won. Some of the
Speaker 2: challenges we had in other parts of the primary and
Speaker 2: then even in the general around race, you saw that
Speaker 2: night along the Iowa-Missouri border. So you begin to see
Speaker 2: patterns that emerge and you can begin to get a
Speaker 2: sense of, OK, that person has strength and they've got weaknesses.
Speaker 2: But Nevada is going to be great for that because
Speaker 2: it's such a diverse state. It has a lot of
Speaker 2: the types of voters that you need to win the nomination.
Speaker 1: Today's presenting sponsor is SimpliSafe Home Security. With end of
Speaker 1: summer sales happening, your porch is probably a landing pad
Speaker 1: for delivery boxes while you're at work. Don't get a
Speaker 1: camera that just films a thief. Choose SimpliSafe to help
Speaker 1: stop them before they even step onto the porch. Unlike
Speaker 1: traditional security systems that only alert you after a break-in
Speaker 1: is already underway, SimpliSafe is designed to help stop intruders
Speaker 1: before they get inside. Smart AI-powered outdoor cameras detect suspicious
Speaker 1: activity at the perimeter and alert live U.S.-based agents to
Speaker 1: step in. SimpliSafe's agents assess the threat, intervene through the
Speaker 1: outdoor camera to scare off trespassers, and call for 911 dispatch.
Speaker 1: Our CEO here at Crooked just got SimpliSafe. She installed
Speaker 1: it herself, and she said it was really easy. The cameras,
Speaker 1: the sensors, all of it to install. Everything's worked great.
Speaker 1: And even when there was a power outage, the system
Speaker 1: was back online right away after the power was restored.
Speaker 1: SimpliSafe's been protecting your world for 20 years. Celebrate their
Speaker 1: anniversary with us and save 60% on your new SimpliSafe
Speaker 1: system at simplisafe.com slash crooked. That's 60% off at simplisafe.com
Speaker 1: slash crooked. Plus, when you order, write in our show
Speaker 1: name in the How Did You Hear About Us survey
Speaker 1: to let them know we sent you. Don't forget, there's
Speaker 1: no safe like SimpliSafe. So the big question about New
Speaker 1: Hampshire is right now whether it happens. We've talked about
Speaker 1: this on the pod, so most people know. But it
Speaker 1: seems like the two options here are now either the
Speaker 1: Democratic Party pays to hold a separate primary or the
Speaker 1: New Hampshire primary doesn't happen. And then maybe your home
Speaker 1: state of Delaware gets the nod. How do you think
Speaker 1: this will shake out? Because it's sort of tough to
Speaker 1: read the tea leaves here based on the comments from
Speaker 1: people in New Hampshire.
Speaker 2: Sure. Well, I mean, New Hampshire can either be relevant
Speaker 2: at number three or irrelevant with a contest that no
Speaker 2: one competes in if they insist on doing it early.
Speaker 2: So it seems to me, commonsensically, I know it's a
Speaker 2: tough pill for them to swallow. They should go three.
Speaker 2: If they don't, then I would just sub Delaware in,
Speaker 2: which is not a battleground state, but it is a
Speaker 2: small state, has some diversity, not really a huge number
Speaker 2: of Latino voters. But I think... you know, hopefully the
Speaker 2: folks in New Hampshire come to their senses and understand that,
Speaker 2: you know, being three, by the way, you know, so
Speaker 2: you have, you know, we'll have a winnowed field by
Speaker 2: that point. Like, you know, New Hampshire is going to
Speaker 2: be really, really important. You know, is it, and by
Speaker 2: the way, we could have a different winner in New
Speaker 2: Hampshire than we do have in the first two states,
Speaker 2: which makes them incredibly relevant. So, so we'll see. But
Speaker 2: I think at the end of the day, it's just,
Speaker 2: it's nonsense to me that you would give up any
Speaker 2: of your power and leverage to have a contest that
Speaker 2: no one's going to compete in.
Speaker 1: And I know that the other complaint then is, well,
Speaker 1: it costs a lot of money and we don't have
Speaker 1: that money. It feels like between the state party and
Speaker 1: the national party, though some money problems there as well,
Speaker 1: between all of these, you're going to be able to find,
Speaker 1: they'll be able to scrounge up the money to hold
Speaker 1: this primary.
Speaker 2: I would imagine so. I would imagine so.
Speaker 1: The other question I had about New Hampshire is, would
Speaker 1: you say that if by the end of New Hampshire,
Speaker 1: after New Hampshire happens, If you. haven't won outright, either
Speaker 1: South Carolina, Nevada, or New Hampshire, you're done?
Speaker 2: Yes. And here's what's interesting. Now, of course, Joe Biden
Speaker 2: performed very poorly in 2020 in the first two states,
Speaker 2: but he did come in second in Nevada, which is,
Speaker 2: I think, underappreciated. If he hadn't done that, I'm not
Speaker 2: sure like Jim Clyburn endorses him, but you know, he
Speaker 2: then became, okay. Showing a little bit of, of, of life.
Speaker 2: The reason I think that's true is like in, in
Speaker 2: that case, he had no one, particularly Bernie had been
Speaker 2: able to claim or earn enough support in the black community.
Speaker 2: So it was waiting for Biden to kind of resuscitate.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: In this case, you're going to have South Carolina first.
Speaker 2: So he, you know, the notion that you wouldn't have
Speaker 2: won South Carolina, Nevada, New Hampshire, but somehow you're going
Speaker 2: to be able to go win Virginia, to me, kind
Speaker 2: of strange credulous. So I think it's going to be,
Speaker 2: you know, and the odds are at that point, maybe
Speaker 2: you have three candidates of equal strength, but history suggests
Speaker 2: it's probably going to be more like two. And of course,
Speaker 2: by the way, if somebody wins the first three states,
Speaker 2: so if they're able to win South, doing well with
Speaker 2: black voters, West, really diverse state with a heavy Latino
Speaker 2: population and New Hampshire, which has always been a contrary state,
Speaker 2: then it's over, right? But I agree with that, John.
Speaker 2: I think this calendar is different in that way, which
Speaker 2: is the person who has the most strength with the
Speaker 2: black vote in the old calendar could get dinged up
Speaker 2: a little bit and then know they had South Carolina
Speaker 2: hanging out there. That's not the case this time.
Speaker 1: So then by the time we get to New Mexico,
Speaker 1: you've got like two or three serious candidates left, max, right?
Speaker 1: And then this is a completely new early state, highest
Speaker 1: percentage of Latinos of any state in the country. Not
Speaker 1: the early states. I didn't realize that of any state,
Speaker 1: like 49, 50 percent Latinos. Maybe more moderate, especially on
Speaker 1: crime and immigration. It's a border state. Like what does
Speaker 1: that race look like when you get to New Mexico
Speaker 1: with two or three people considering that electorate?
Speaker 2: Well, you know, what's interesting about that is, you know,
Speaker 2: this is all fictitious kind of bullshit. But let's say,
Speaker 2: you know, there is a candidate who comes in second
Speaker 2: or third in South Carolina, Nevada, but they win New Hampshire.
Speaker 2: You know, that's for them to show that they've got
Speaker 2: the ability to grow their coalition. And in this case,
Speaker 2: it would be with Latino voters. New Mexico becomes really,
Speaker 2: really important. So the other way I look at it
Speaker 2: is if you've won Nevada, you better also win New Mexico,
Speaker 2: because if you don't, it's going to look like, you know,
Speaker 2: you're Back to your expectations thing, a sense that, oh,
Speaker 2: you won in the West, now you've lost in the
Speaker 2: West in a place with heavy Latino voters. So it's
Speaker 2: interesting because your point, New Mexico has never been on
Speaker 2: this stage and it hasn't been a battleground state in
Speaker 2: a long time. So it's a state that I think
Speaker 2: a lot of people don't know particularly well. So it's
Speaker 2: actually a great educational opportunity for people. But again, it's
Speaker 2: not a huge state either. So I think building an
Speaker 2: organization there is going to be really, really important. And
Speaker 2: New Mexico is the kind of state where even though
Speaker 2: you're going to be very focused on South Carolina and Nevada,
Speaker 2: in 2027, you're going to want to spend some time there.
Speaker 2: I think that's a state you're going to want to
Speaker 2: spend a lot of time in.
Speaker 1: Then there's Michigan and Virginia. And I don't know, to me,
Speaker 1: it seems like that's two weeks of running basically a
Speaker 1: national campaign just based on their size, where they fall
Speaker 1: in the calendar, the diversity of their electorates. if you
Speaker 1: survive until those two, if you're like one of the
Speaker 1: last two left, is that the kind of campaign you're running?
Speaker 1: Like more of a national campaign at that point? Or
Speaker 1: what do you think?
Speaker 2: Well, I think you're going to be on the ground.
Speaker 2: So the week between New Mexico and Michigan, you're probably
Speaker 2: only in Michigan. Um, but I do think that, um,
Speaker 2: you know, as you get deeper into that, the early States,
Speaker 2: particularly now that we have six, I do think that, um,
Speaker 2: it's harder. It's not like you're going to be able
Speaker 2: to course correct in Michigan and like your weakness elsewhere
Speaker 2: is kind of not known by voters. Like these patterns
Speaker 2: emerge and expectations emerge. So I do think that the
Speaker 2: national discussion, the national debate is going to be, even
Speaker 2: national polls will be important. But you're going to be
Speaker 2: bunkered in Michigan and then you're going to be bunkered
Speaker 2: in Virginia that next week. And so, and you obviously,
Speaker 2: by the way, this is a challenge for the candidates
Speaker 2: because It was hard enough back when we did it
Speaker 2: to like you had four. Of course, we spent most
Speaker 2: of our time in Iowa, but not all of it.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: So now you've got six and some of them are
Speaker 2: quite big, the last two in particular. So and then
Speaker 2: you've got to build staff and organization and volunteers and
Speaker 2: resource these things. But so I think that the national
Speaker 2: discussion will be more important in Michigan and Virginia than
Speaker 2: it is in the first two states for sure.
Speaker 1: Yeah, that's sort of what I was thinking.
Speaker 2: Yes, I think that's right. But you're basically, you know,
Speaker 2: doing seven, eight events a day in each in these states,
Speaker 2: I think, during that period. And, you know, obviously, Michigan,
Speaker 2: you're going to have the campuses there are incredibly important.
Speaker 2: I still think the Middle Eastern and Gaza issues will
Speaker 2: be important. You've obviously got a huge manufacturing sector. So,
Speaker 2: you know, you know, I think that and by the way,
Speaker 2: I think that, you know, There'll also be a sense
Speaker 2: from voters, which is because Michigan is a big battleground state,
Speaker 2: like who's kind of filling the stage? Like, you know,
Speaker 2: there's still an art to this and voters have a
Speaker 2: sense of like, I can imagine that person as our
Speaker 2: nominee and as our president. And I think particularly as
Speaker 2: you get to those last two states, that kind of
Speaker 2: presence is going to be really, really important.
Speaker 1: Let's talk a little bit about the candidates or potential candidates.
Speaker 1: This is my bias, but I have believed for some
Speaker 1: time that if you were to rank candidates the different
Speaker 1: political assets a candidate could have in 2028, like number
Speaker 1: one would be talent, charisma, the ability to effectively communicate,
Speaker 1: get attention. I mean, I've always thought that was important, obviously,
Speaker 1: but I think the information environment we're in has made
Speaker 1: it just more important than ever and maybe the most
Speaker 1: important political asset. Obviously, that's not to say it's the
Speaker 1: best way to pick a president, right? It's not, but
Speaker 1: it is reality. But I wonder what you think about that.
Speaker 2: Absolutely. I mean, to me, that holds the first, you know, one,
Speaker 2: two and three slots. And by the way, it's more
Speaker 2: important now. But I mean, 2020 was an exception. You know,
Speaker 2: I think that voters were really looking for not the
Speaker 2: exciting candidate when when Biden was able to beat Trump.
Speaker 2: And obviously, COVID was the driver there. But Obama, Trump, Reagan, Clinton, Kennedy,
Speaker 2: like The most exciting candidate tends to 88 was another
Speaker 2: exception to that, but that was a weird race, George
Speaker 2: HW into caucus. Right.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: Um, so I think the most interesting candidate, the most
Speaker 2: exciting candidate, the person who understands the communication modalities of
Speaker 2: the moment, uh, you know, is generally in a good position.
Speaker 2: I think that's even more so now. So yeah, I
Speaker 2: think the ability to perform, to excite, to interest, um,
Speaker 2: you know, to build trust, that is core. And I
Speaker 2: think that, I think a lot of people struggle with that. Well,
Speaker 2: I've got a good biography or I've won in my
Speaker 2: state or I've got a great healthcare plan. It doesn't
Speaker 2: matter in a presidential race. You know, it's, I mean,
Speaker 2: by the way, look at 16. That was a strong
Speaker 2: Republican field and Donald Trump mowed them all down. Now,
Speaker 2: part of that was his party was just looking for
Speaker 2: something so fundamentally different. I think our party is as well,
Speaker 2: but also he was a performer. Yes. And he got it.
Speaker 2: And so I think performance is the coin of the realm.
Speaker 2: And I do think that it's got to be someone
Speaker 2: who excels at short form vertical video. Now, if they
Speaker 2: can do a three hour podcast about culture or food
Speaker 2: or sports, that's awesome. They still have to be able
Speaker 2: to give speeches. They have to do good local TV
Speaker 2: interviews with the affiliates in Greenville, South Carolina and Reno, Nevada.
Speaker 2: But the most important thing is that content that they're
Speaker 2: putting out every day.
Speaker 1: I mean, I also think you brought up 2020. Joe
Speaker 1: Biden in that race is also someone with almost 100%
Speaker 1: name ID, right? He's the vice president to Barack Obama
Speaker 1: and has been on the scene for decades. Everyone knows
Speaker 1: Joe Biden. And so there's a comfort there. I think
Speaker 1: that we're in an information environment now where it's really
Speaker 1: hard to become known nationally beyond the political junkies like
Speaker 1: us and the highly engaged Democratic voters that vote in
Speaker 1: the primaries we're seeing now in the special elections. There's
Speaker 1: a whole world out there. And it feels like we
Speaker 1: haven't had a nominee from either party in a while,
Speaker 1: maybe since our boss, who just kind of came out
Speaker 1: of nowhere and became nationally known. Like, there was a Clinton,
Speaker 1: there was a Trump, there was like McCain, Bush, Bush.
Speaker 2: Right.
Speaker 1: And so like, this is maybe the first time where,
Speaker 1: I mean, I guess if Kamala Harris runs, you know,
Speaker 1: she ran before, so that's, she has a hundred percent
Speaker 1: name ID, but beyond that sort of hard to get
Speaker 1: known unless you're super talented.
Speaker 2: Absolutely. It's such a great point. So, um, And by
Speaker 2: the way, you can't force yourself to be known. The
Speaker 2: way you'll get known is people kind of experience you
Speaker 2: on their phones or their TV screens and they want
Speaker 2: to know more about you. Right. And this is the
Speaker 2: important thing. I mean, most the voters that will determine,
Speaker 2: you know, our nominee and the presidency, you know, some
Speaker 2: of them are political junkies, but a lot of them don't.
Speaker 2: They kind of encounter information. They don't seek it out.
Speaker 2: So but I will say one thing about the early states, though,
Speaker 2: like we've historically you've seen like whether it be Iowa,
Speaker 2: New Hampshire, South Carolina and the old calendar. you know,
Speaker 2: they behave differently often than the national polls. So, you know,
Speaker 2: it's still most important if you're running for president, like
Speaker 2: in South Carolina and then Nevada, like that's where I
Speaker 2: want to be known. And if I'm less known nationally,
Speaker 2: you know, if there's a delta there, that's OK. To
Speaker 2: your point, by Michigan, Virginia, I think those things converge.
Speaker 2: But that's exactly right. And, you know, why will someone
Speaker 2: come out to a town hall? Why will someone, you know,
Speaker 2: look at and share your YouTube video? It's not because
Speaker 2: of the what you're saying necessarily. It's kind of how
Speaker 2: you connect with people. And, you know, that all comes
Speaker 2: down to charisma and interest and performance and talent. And,
Speaker 2: of course, a good performer doesn't look like they're performing.
Speaker 2: You know, it's got to be someone who's just naturally
Speaker 2: gifted in that way.
Speaker 1: Today's show is sponsored by Strawberry.me. Have you ever written
Speaker 1: a review about a product or service you've used? It
Speaker 1: takes an extraordinary experience, either overwhelmingly positive or deeply disappointing,
Speaker 1: for someone to take the time to write a review. Strawberry.me's
Speaker 1: positive reviews speak for themselves, proving why professionals rely on
Speaker 1: the platform for certified career coaching. Not just a few reviews,
Speaker 1: there are literally hundreds of them at strawberry.me slash reviews,
Speaker 1: all unfiltered and glowing. Here's a sample review from a Strawberry.me client.
Speaker 1: Krista is an incredible, thoughtful, positive coach. She helped me
Speaker 1: build my confidence and voice back up, revise my resume,
Speaker 1: navigate an industry change, and become more intentional in my
Speaker 1: job search. Highly recommend. Review after review tells the same story.
Speaker 1: My coach was amazing. The experience was transformative. And I
Speaker 1: landed a new job within weeks. When so many people
Speaker 1: take the time to leave positive reviews, it is clear
Speaker 1: the product is something special. So if you're feeling stuck
Speaker 1: at work, do what tens of thousands of people have
Speaker 1: already done. Go to strawberry.me slash cricket and claim 50%
Speaker 1: off your first coaching session today. That's strawberry.me slash crooked.
Speaker 1: What do you make of the Ossoff boomlet as of late?
Speaker 2: Well, he's clearly a very talented communicator. He's also he's clear.
Speaker 2: He's strong. He's direct. I think voters like that. I mean,
Speaker 2: he's in Georgia. He's not in New York or Massachusetts,
Speaker 2: I think probably indicting Trump more effectively than anybody else.
Speaker 2: There's courage that comes with that too. And he's shown
Speaker 2: the ability, I think, to really be a great speech maker.
Speaker 2: The question is, you know, in his own, you know,
Speaker 2: own content, in interviews, in town halls, I think right
Speaker 2: now he's probably not a stronger performer as he is
Speaker 2: on the speech stage. But he's also younger. And listen,
Speaker 2: our voters are so desperately For things that are new
Speaker 2: and fresh. And that's the other thing that's interesting for like,
Speaker 2: by the way, John Ossoff has said he's not going
Speaker 2: to run. Right. AOC, you know, we'll see. But like,
Speaker 2: and by the way, you probably get the same thing
Speaker 2: like from donors or reporters. I can't believe he might
Speaker 2: not run. It's like, well, it's actually a good thing
Speaker 2: if somebody really doesn't want the job that they shouldn't run. Like,
Speaker 2: let's actually applaud them. But for some of these candidates
Speaker 2: who maybe think, the one thing I'd say is you
Speaker 2: can't pick your timing. Like, let's say Obama hadn't run
Speaker 2: in 08. And Hillary maybe ran and won and served
Speaker 2: to like in 2016, he'd be ending his second term
Speaker 2: in the U.S. Senate with all the barnacles of Washington
Speaker 2: on him. So if you are a Democrat thinking that
Speaker 2: I would like to seek the White House and is
Speaker 2: now too early, it's not. This is the time to
Speaker 2: run because you can't predict the future. And as fast
Speaker 2: as things move these days in 48 years, 48 years,
Speaker 2: you're almost certainly going to be yesterday's news.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: So this is the time to run. But but again,
Speaker 2: I think Ossoff is really capturing people's attention because obviously
Speaker 2: he's charismatic. He is a great speechmaker. But also what
Speaker 2: he's saying, I think, comes across as clear and courageous
Speaker 2: and with conviction. And people are hungry for that.
Speaker 1: Yeah. My question with him is like, what is the
Speaker 1: next act? Because right now it makes sense that he's
Speaker 1: going after Trump and he's in a Senate race and
Speaker 1: all that. Obviously, once that ends. you need to start
Speaker 1: talking about what you believe, what you see for the country.
Speaker 1: And you do these, you do podcasts, you do longer
Speaker 1: form interviews, you do different content, you don't just do
Speaker 1: the stump speech. And so it'll be interesting to see that.
Speaker 1: And I was wondering, like a lot of other people,
Speaker 1: I see his speeches and I'm like, wow, he's great.
Speaker 1: I haven't seen someone like that in a while. And
Speaker 1: then I think about how we felt about Beto in 2020.
Speaker 1: And I'm like, Are we just drawn to candidates who
Speaker 1: seem like they have Obama-level talent and then when they
Speaker 1: hit the national stage, something goes wrong? I mean, there's
Speaker 1: a difference there, which is like Beto was a congressman
Speaker 1: in Texas. And if Ossoff runs, he has just won
Speaker 1: Georgia twice, which is– that's a pretty good credential to
Speaker 1: match with the talent. But I don't know what you
Speaker 1: think about sort of– What seems inspiring and like a
Speaker 1: good communicator versus like what actually works on the trail?
Speaker 2: It's a great question, John. But, you know, Beto is
Speaker 2: a good example. Like he got in. I can't even
Speaker 2: remember the specifics, but didn't get into the race well.
Speaker 1: Right.
Speaker 2: Wasn't like a Vanity Fair thing or whatever. Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2: It's a good, you know, even like John Ossoff, if
Speaker 2: he runs and, you know, spends his first, you know,
Speaker 2: month in South Carolina and it's like, well, the sizzle
Speaker 2: is not there. Like it's hard to recover from that. Yeah. Like,
Speaker 2: you know, it's a brutal thing. But, you know, I
Speaker 2: do think at the end of the day, voters are
Speaker 2: going to want to choose someone that, yes, they think
Speaker 2: can win the White House back. But they want to
Speaker 2: be with someone who excites them, who inspires them, you know,
Speaker 2: who has that kind of talent and charisma. And so, no,
Speaker 2: I don't think we're wrong to single out people who
Speaker 2: are showing signs of it. But, you know, the other
Speaker 2: thing I'd say, you know, giving a speech in the
Speaker 2: Atlanta suburbs that's filmed beautifully and clipped beautifully is different
Speaker 2: than being like in Greenville with 15 people in South Carolina.
Speaker 2: And they're kind of yawning at you and you don't
Speaker 2: have your stuff that day. Like it's hard. I mean, listen,
Speaker 2: Barack Obama, as skilled as he was, as you know,
Speaker 2: the first part of 2007 was a big struggle for us.
Speaker 1: Brutal, brutal. Um, obviously AOC, we talked about AOC a
Speaker 1: little bit, like she is presumably making a decision whether
Speaker 1: she should seek the Senate seat or run for president. Um,
Speaker 1: like if she was asking you, like, how do I
Speaker 1: make this decision? What would you tell her?
Speaker 2: She just should do what feels right to her. And
Speaker 2: I think if she actually thinks that she would be
Speaker 2: a good president and this is the moment to try,
Speaker 2: she should run for president. I wouldn't even, for me,
Speaker 2: it's not even, that's the, that's the key question. And
Speaker 2: then if she says no, then I think a secondary
Speaker 2: question is, you know, what I'd like to be in
Speaker 2: the Senate. I don't, I don't, I don't see it
Speaker 2: as like, let's compare the two. It's like, and, and
Speaker 2: so I think, um, And I think of all the candidates,
Speaker 2: she's the one that from a performance standpoint seems to
Speaker 2: have the broadest skill set. And she'd start with a
Speaker 2: strong base, I think, and would have basically a volunteer
Speaker 2: campaign in waiting. Like in all six early states, AOC
Speaker 2: would start with thousands of people who would like not
Speaker 2: just like say they want to volunteer, they'd like volunteer. So,
Speaker 2: you know, but I think and by the way, there's
Speaker 2: an interesting I think in the donor class in the
Speaker 2: Democratic Party, there's a view that, well, we have to
Speaker 2: make sure the most electable Democrat wins. First of all,
Speaker 2: we have no idea what's most electable. We have no
Speaker 2: idea what voters will want. It's a long time away
Speaker 2: from now. But it's not out of the question that
Speaker 2: someone like AOC is most electable. Like this is a
Speaker 2: terrible economy and people are desiring maximum stability in their
Speaker 2: own life, which they don't have. And they want it
Speaker 2: through maximum political instability. Like they don't want to repeat
Speaker 2: a Biden or Trump or even Obama. They want something
Speaker 2: new and different. And even though she's been on the
Speaker 2: stage for a long time. So but I think it
Speaker 2: comes down to not just for her, for all these candidates,
Speaker 2: but for her. Not not about, well, let me compare
Speaker 2: the Senate. It's like, do I want to run for president?
Speaker 2: Would I like to be president? And if so, I
Speaker 2: should enter the race. And by the way, she's a
Speaker 2: great example. Like, I wouldn't say, well, I'll do it
Speaker 2: eight years from now. Like, I doubt that'll be available
Speaker 2: for AOC eight years from now. It's available now if
Speaker 2: she chooses to seek it. And she may decide for
Speaker 2: a variety of reasons that's not what she wants to do.
Speaker 2: And then I assume she'd run for the Senate and
Speaker 2: it'd be exciting to have her in the Senate.
Speaker 1: Now, one person who has definitely run for president before,
Speaker 1: so she wants to be president and has run for president,
Speaker 1: is Kamala Harris. I noticed this week both Rob Sand
Speaker 1: and Josh Turek were like, you know, we don't want
Speaker 1: her to campaign with us in Iowa. Mary Paltola, you know,
Speaker 1: sort of her campaign, I think, rejected an endorsement that
Speaker 1: was just a fundraising letter. that Kamala sent out for them,
Speaker 1: an email. I think Rob Sandler just said to Jay Mark,
Speaker 1: point blank, like, no, I don't think she should run.
Speaker 1: We need something new. What do you think? Do you
Speaker 1: think Kamala should run?
Speaker 2: Listen, I think people want something new, for sure. I
Speaker 2: think for her, I think she'll make a very responsible decision.
Speaker 2: I think it won't just be about her desires. I
Speaker 2: think she'll want to make sure that Democrats can win
Speaker 2: back the White House. You know, she would start in
Speaker 2: an enviable position, particularly with South Carolina first. You know,
Speaker 2: but at the end of the day, you know, my
Speaker 2: view is that there are a lot of candidates out
Speaker 2: there thinking about running for president. And what I think
Speaker 2: is clear is I think by the first quarter of 28,
Speaker 2: even more so than now, and it's pretty pronounced now,
Speaker 2: people are going to want something new. Now, by the way,
Speaker 2: Kamala would be the least new person if she ran.
Speaker 2: It may be at the end of the day, if
Speaker 2: she seems new and different, if she's got new ideas,
Speaker 2: if she's got a crisper, like she herself could be
Speaker 2: not just, we shouldn't assume it's just like Kamala from
Speaker 2: 20 and 24. If that's the case, I don't think
Speaker 2: there's a market for it. So we'll see. And the
Speaker 2: other thing is, you know, if you're just thinking about
Speaker 2: the X's and O's, I think she would know that,
Speaker 2: you know, I'd start in a strong position, but it
Speaker 2: probably is going to get eroded over time. That's not
Speaker 2: a lot of fun to be the front runner, but
Speaker 2: someone's got to emerge who can win the plurality of
Speaker 2: the black vote to beat her.
Speaker 1: Yeah.
Speaker 2: And that's quite possible. But, you know, so you'd sit there.
Speaker 2: I think on the one hand, you know that most
Speaker 2: voters want something new, something different. You're not that. On
Speaker 2: the other hand, you've got a strong position in the
Speaker 2: race and a bunch of candidates who, you know, don't
Speaker 2: have the kind of strength that she would start with.
Speaker 2: So I think it's going to be really interesting. But,
Speaker 2: you know, my guess is she'll make a pretty selfless
Speaker 2: decision at the end of the day. Maybe not entirely.
Speaker 2: She obviously has run twice. So she's wanted to be president.
Speaker 2: But I think at the end of the day, she'll
Speaker 2: have to really think through, like, what is the likelihood
Speaker 2: that people want a rerun? And I think the likelihood
Speaker 2: is not high. So it's going to be interesting to me.
Speaker 2: And again, the other thing I'd say for all these candidates,
Speaker 2: and she's been through it, so she knows, it is
Speaker 2: a brutal, brutal fucking process. So you really, really have
Speaker 2: to want to do this. You have to be okay
Speaker 2: with losing. You have to be okay with being humiliated.
Speaker 2: And ultimately, if you win, you know, you've got the
Speaker 2: hardest job on the face of the earth. And, you know,
Speaker 2: you probably, you know, cut years off your life. I mean,
Speaker 2: what's interesting is, you know, every president, when you look
Speaker 2: at those pictures of them, looks so much worse. Now,
Speaker 2: Trump doesn't look worse because of stress. It's just because
Speaker 2: he's an unhealthy, you know, guy. But like, so you
Speaker 2: really have to want to do it. Like, I don't
Speaker 2: think Barack Obama was pathological about it, but he really wanted,
Speaker 2: you know, to take a shot at it, right? And
Speaker 2: it is excruciating. So there's also just, yeah, there's the
Speaker 2: X's and O's and what's the field look like and
Speaker 2: what's the calendar. There is that gut check of like, A,
Speaker 2: do I actually think I'd be a great president? Can
Speaker 2: I win the election? But also, do I want to
Speaker 2: put me and my family through this? Because there's no shortcuts.
Speaker 2: There are no shortcuts.
Speaker 1: Are there any candidates you think could be really strong
Speaker 1: contenders who maybe aren't being talked about in that way
Speaker 1: just yet? And I also, I know that Remember, you
Speaker 1: and Dan talked about the potential of an outsider candidate,
Speaker 1: someone we haven't even talked about, someone that no one's
Speaker 1: been talking about. That was in January. I feel like
Speaker 1: it's not too late to decide to run now, but
Speaker 1: it seems like it's getting late to at least not
Speaker 1: have heard some rumors about people that are outsiders that
Speaker 1: might run.
Speaker 2: Yeah, I think that's probably right. Although, listen, my sincere
Speaker 2: hope is that there's two or three people who run
Speaker 2: that you and I wouldn't even talk about. Maybe there's
Speaker 2: like a house... candidate who takes a flyer, you know,
Speaker 2: maybe one of these Senate candidates who might win a
Speaker 2: tough state decides to run. Right. I mean, uh, so, um,
Speaker 2: I think the barrier to entry is lower than it
Speaker 2: used to be. Uh, you know, people talk about Jon Stewart. Like, uh,
Speaker 2: my hope is that we have a massive field as
Speaker 2: painful as those debate stages will be. We want a
Speaker 2: massive field and, and have people go out there and
Speaker 2: strut their stuff and, and see if people, uh, are
Speaker 2: willing to accept them as our nominee and as our
Speaker 2: next president. So I hope a bunch of people take
Speaker 2: a flyer on it. And there's always, you know, John,
Speaker 2: what's interesting is there is no way, even like Kamala
Speaker 2: as a front runner can say, well, I think I'm
Speaker 2: in strong shape in South Carolina. But, you know, it's
Speaker 2: a complete crapshoot. There's no way to sit and, well,
Speaker 2: it's not like there's a secret plan for someone to
Speaker 2: be the nominee that no one else can see. You
Speaker 2: just got to throw yourself out there. And, you know,
Speaker 2: most people obviously will not survive the process. But you
Speaker 2: just got to have faith that, you know, your voice
Speaker 2: and your ideas and your background might be what our
Speaker 2: party's looking for at this particular moment. So I hope
Speaker 2: a bunch of people look at it that we might
Speaker 2: not be talking about. And I actually think it is
Speaker 2: like anybody that's successful in this election in tough places.
Speaker 2: I hope they like think about it. Because you wouldn't. Oh,
Speaker 2: they're running already. That doesn't exist anymore. Yeah. You can
Speaker 2: run any time you want and you won't pay a
Speaker 2: price and you might actually be advantaged by it. Yeah.
Speaker 1: You think like if James Tallarico becomes the first Democrat
Speaker 1: to turn Texas blue in however many decades, of course,
Speaker 1: people are going to say maybe he should take a
Speaker 1: look at it.
Speaker 2: Yeah. And I'm sure all of these people will say,
Speaker 2: of course, they wouldn't. And most of them won't run.
Speaker 2: But my point is there's no barrier to entry. Any
Speaker 2: of these people who, by the way, could even be
Speaker 2: somebody who loses narrowly in a place and decides to run. So,
Speaker 2: you know, it's kind of back to our point is
Speaker 2: if you have talent, if you've got the ability to
Speaker 2: connect with tough to connect with voters, you know, that
Speaker 2: is the kind of thing that actually can go that
Speaker 2: that that that is evidence that you could mount a
Speaker 2: strong presidential campaign.
Speaker 1: David Plouffe, I could talk with you about this stuff
Speaker 1: for another five hours, but I will let you go.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for taking the time, and let's
Speaker 1: do it again once the primary season heats up.
Speaker 2: Once the rodeo begins.
Speaker 1: The shit show.
Speaker 2: Yeah.
Speaker 1: All right, buddy. Take care.
Speaker 2: Good to be with you, John.
Speaker 1: That's our show for today. Thanks for joining. Tommy, John,
Speaker 1: and I will be back with a new show in
Speaker 1: your feeds on Tuesdays. Pod Save America is a Crooked
Speaker 1: Media production. Our show is produced by Austin Fisher, Saul Rubin,
Speaker 1: McKenna Roberts, and Farrah Safari with Ree Churlin, Elijah Cohn,
Speaker 1: and Adrian Hill. Our team includes Matt DeGroat, Ben Hethcote,
Speaker 1: Jordan Cantor, Charlotte Landis, David Tolles, Mia Kelman, Ryan Young,
Speaker 1: and Naomi Single. Our staff is proudly unionized with the
Speaker 1: Writers Guild of America East.