0:00

Time for a quick break to talk about

0:02

McDonald's. Mornings are for mixing and matching at

0:04

McDonald's. For just $3, mix and match two

0:07

of your favorite breakfast items, including a

0:09

sausage McMuffin. Hello

0:31

from Washington. I'm Chuck Todd, and this is

0:33

the Chuck Todd cast. So as

0:35

you know, our new NBC news poll over

0:37

the weekend showed yet another sign of tightening, the

0:40

tightening race of the white house, if you will.

0:42

And if you're a supporter of president Biden, we're comforted

0:45

to see him in all the way at president Trump's

0:47

early lead in the head to head polling. And that

0:49

is approval rating is moving up, not

0:51

down in an election here. Um,

0:54

and you're going to hear this later in

0:56

this podcast, but it's an, it, trajectory matters

0:59

for sitting presidents. Um, even

1:01

though the Biden number is low, the fact that

1:03

it's, it's moving north and not South in

1:06

this period of time is a big deal. George

1:08

H.W. Bush and Jimmy Carter, both other numbers go

1:10

South in their election. You're not North did

1:12

it with president Trump. So this is why it's a,

1:15

uh, even though it's small, even though

1:17

the raw numbers low, it is not

1:20

insignificant to see that kind of movement that

1:23

said, there's still plenty of signs of weakness, uh,

1:26

for Democrats and Biden specifically in our latest

1:28

numbers, voters overall continue to give the president

1:30

poor marks on issues that they

1:32

say will determine their vote, most notably on the

1:34

economy. And I want to get at this economy

1:36

question here, because it really is about cost. Um,

1:39

and my guest, you know, that I'm

1:41

going to have here is Doug Sosnick. He's a

1:43

long time senior democratic, uh, advisor

1:46

for many democratic campaigns back in the day,

1:48

the most notably bill Clinton and his real

1:50

act, but he's become a vault

1:53

of interesting information. Um,

1:56

he's always been sort of a numbers

1:58

guy and he, his power. points. He

2:01

shares with a handful of reporters every

2:03

quarter or so, and they're always among

2:06

the best, most interesting analysis there is.

2:08

You may have seen Doug's work very

2:10

recently in The New York Times. They

2:12

took all of his various scenarios, his

2:14

battleground maps, and they created a wonderful

2:16

graphic to just show

2:19

the various paths. And I think

2:21

the point that Doug was trying to make is that

2:23

Trump has more paths to 270 right now than

2:26

Biden, and it's something we're going to talk

2:28

about. But before we get to Doug, look,

2:31

the issue of the economy is real, and

2:33

that really is going to be, you know, Biden's

2:36

got a challenge. If he can make this about

2:38

Trump, that's his path to re-election, but he certainly,

2:41

Trump's going to try to make this a

2:43

referendum on the economy and Biden. So

2:46

he's got to have an answer somewhat on this,

2:48

and it is tough. It is tough for him to

2:51

penetrate here because while the

2:53

metrics of the economy are positive,

2:55

right, low unemployment, expanding GDP, right,

2:57

you know, as far as if you're

2:59

looking just sort of at America's economic health, it

3:01

looks good from 60,000 feet.

3:04

The problem is when you ask people, how's this

3:06

economy working for them? And

3:08

two-thirds of voters told us they're struggling to

3:10

keep up financially, right? They're struggling to keep

3:12

pace. So they have a job, right?

3:15

You know, in the Obama years, we

3:17

judge the economy based on the unemployment rate, right?

3:20

In fact, I remember distinctly, you know, the question

3:22

was in Obama's re-elect year, unemployment was over 8%,

3:25

and no sitting

3:27

president had ever won re-election with unemployment over 8%.

3:30

Unemployment dipped to 7.9% in November

3:32

of 2012. So the

3:34

pattern holds, and

3:37

Obama narrowly won re-election,

3:40

and he narrowly sort of that

3:42

sort of, if you will, marker

3:46

for re-election holds. But

3:48

that isn't how we're judging this economy. We're

3:50

judging it on prices. We're judging it on cost.

3:52

And what I would say is, if you really

3:54

want to understand the frustration with this economy, try

3:56

being a first-time homebuyer. home

4:00

buyer, you've got two issues facing you right now. You got number

4:02

one is high interest rates. And again, Doug Sosnick

4:04

and I are going to talk about this, but most people don't.

4:07

Most people alive today have never experienced interest

4:09

rates, frankly, over 5%, let alone over

4:11

7%. You know,

4:13

I remember when my parents got excited when it went to the

4:16

home buyer But,

6:00

you know, this one thing that

6:02

you need to be careful of

6:05

is just saying, oh, this is the media

6:07

somehow driving the perception of the economy being

6:09

bad. I know that some liberal columnist at

6:11

the Times like to make this argument and

6:14

it's like, no, it's reality. You

6:16

know, this isn't a drummed up thing,

6:18

you know. Plenty of people are reporting

6:20

accurately what's happening with the economy, which

6:22

is the macro numbers are great. But

6:25

the micro economies for people's households, that's

6:27

so much. So,

6:30

before we go, get going

6:32

with the guest here. I want to also

6:34

let you know that I am taking listener

6:36

questions. If you have a question, send it

6:39

to the Chuck Toddcast, thechucktoddcast@gmail.com. And

6:41

if you stick around for the end of today's show,

6:43

you're going to hear my answer to our latest question.

6:45

So, I wanted to plant

6:47

my flag there a minute. So,

6:50

as I said, my guest is Doug Sosnick, former

6:52

senior advisor to President Bill Clinton, someone

6:55

who's advised more than 50 senators and governors

6:57

in his latest essay for The New York Times.

6:59

He lays out 11 different maps that

7:01

he says explain why President Biden has

7:03

a narrower path to the presidency than

7:06

former President Donald Trump's office. Take in

7:08

a quick break and when you come

7:10

back, our conversation with Mr. Sosnick. In

7:16

the Air Force Reserve, you get more time to do more

7:18

of what you want. Want to finally start

7:21

that new business? Go for it. Is

7:23

it time to go back to school for that master's degree? You

7:26

got it. Do you need to move for a

7:28

new civilian career but still want to serve? That's

7:31

all you. Or do you want to serve while

7:33

being closer to family? Hey, more power to

7:35

you. The Air Force Reserve gives

7:37

you the control to really take your career

7:39

and life into your own hands. So, when

7:41

you're ready for more, go to afreserve.com and

7:44

find out what more means to you. So,

7:46

joining me now is Doug Sosnick. I want

7:49

to start with all those fancy graphics in

7:51

The New York Times with your maps. I

7:54

get a lot of your stuff. I don't remember

7:56

you having all these fancy graphics with your maps.

7:59

I mean, how cool was that? that to see all that show

8:01

up like that. It was

8:03

a nice journey to once have video art

8:05

times behind me when I'm writing something. Yeah.

8:10

Back in the day when they were covering the Clinton White House,

8:12

you didn't always love them so much. So

8:15

look, I am, there's

8:18

a part of me that wants to just go

8:20

into a coma, self-induced coma

8:22

and wake up about October 30th because

8:26

I just don't know if there's

8:28

anything between now and then that

8:30

we're going to learn about this campaign. But

8:36

I want to spend some time looking at it through the

8:38

numbers and through the battleground states. How much

8:40

of this, of the campaign in

8:43

the next three months do you think matters

8:45

to the final result? Well,

8:47

let me reframe what

8:50

I believe at least what you just said

8:52

a little differently. One

8:56

of the things that has changed the most

8:58

since Chuck, you and I started working in

9:00

politics was when we started out, we had

9:02

what you call election day, the first Tuesday

9:04

in November. In the

9:06

last election, by the first

9:08

Tuesday in November, 70% of

9:11

the people in this country had already voted. So

9:15

as we think about when you

9:17

want to wake up in a coma, you

9:19

probably want to wake up in a coma in August. Really?

9:24

I'd rather have some votes banked. That's why I was

9:26

thinking October 15th, but that's all right. Well, I mean,

9:28

going back to even the 1980 where

9:30

the ultimate campaign

9:32

broke in the last eight

9:35

days with the last debate, if

9:37

you have a debate now at the end of October, that's

9:39

probably the majority of the country we're voting. But it's the

9:41

only point I'm making is I

9:44

think you need to think about the election day

9:47

more about September

9:49

being the start of the end and

9:51

not the end. I don't

9:53

disagree with that notion, and I get what you're saying,

9:56

but I guess my argument would be

9:58

the people that vote in September... We already know how

10:00

they're voting. The question

10:02

is what's that, what's the

10:04

last 10% doing? And I guess I

10:06

don't expect them to tune in until the

10:09

last spot. I go back to when you're

10:11

not looking forward to doing something, your colonoscopy,

10:14

that last, you know, test you want

10:16

to do, you put it off. And

10:19

I think these last sort of uninspired voters, they're

10:21

not going to vote in September, do you expect

10:23

them to vote early or do you expect them

10:25

to vote late? I would

10:27

be more inclined to agree with what you said about the

10:29

2020 election than the 2034 election.

10:32

The reason I say that is I think

10:34

there's a real open question. There

10:37

are two open issues here. One you've raised, which

10:39

is that 10% how they're going to vote. Yeah,

10:41

sure. The other though, I think turnout is going

10:43

to be a big issue here. Uh,

10:46

like before in 2020, as you know, the

10:48

highest turnout for those voters percentage wise in

10:50

over a hundred years, 2018 midterm

10:54

was one of the highest in history in 2022

10:56

wasn't much far behind. I think the

10:58

first question is going to be who's actually going to vote? Who's

11:01

actually going to turn it out? I'm with you there. I

11:03

think this is an, I think this is the biggest, uh,

11:07

this is the biggest increase in variance in

11:09

the potential outcomes now is this idea. Look,

11:12

I think it's the biggest thing we found

11:14

in our new poll this week is that

11:16

the first time this century that

11:19

we found people basically not following the selection

11:21

and frankly, it's perfectly rational. Why do I

11:23

need? Why am I, you know, why

11:26

am I following it very closely when I've, a

11:29

lot of people say, I already know everything I need to know about

11:31

these two candidates. I don't need to, I don't need to pay particular

11:33

attention right now. But that's why I think it's bigger

11:35

than that last 10%. And,

11:38

and, and I'll say two things that are

11:41

somewhat contradictory. The first

11:43

is I've always believed that the role of

11:45

money in politics is exaggerated and

11:47

higher the office, I think the less

11:49

important money is because people have a

11:52

lot more information. Right. Um,

11:54

uh, but Biden

11:57

right now through the money. coming

12:00

in for Democrats and

12:03

on the other side, there are two things happening with

12:05

Trump. One is his donor

12:08

numbers are down. A lot of them

12:10

are older voters, probably some of

12:12

them died off and a lot of

12:14

them have Trump email fatigue. And the other

12:16

part of that is, you know, spending all

12:18

his money he's raising on his legal fees. So

12:21

I actually think that Biden's money

12:24

differential, because we're not

12:26

talking about when you and I were starting

12:28

out in politics, we have like 18 states

12:31

that are in play. We have

12:33

so few states that are in play. And

12:35

Biden has such a financial advantage

12:38

that if I were running the Biden operation,

12:40

I would be devoting

12:43

vast sums of that money to getting

12:47

people to vote who are going to vote

12:49

for Biden if they vote, who

12:51

are very unenthusiastic about voting

12:53

at all. And so I

12:56

think that that

12:58

could be a decisive advantage for Biden

13:00

if he plays it right. Let's

13:03

talk about the idea of the early

13:05

campaign, because, you know, in many ways,

13:08

what you were part of and you were an

13:10

architect of in 95,

13:12

and I say this in 95, I remember

13:14

distinctly you guys, and at the

13:16

time, it was an unusual thing. Presidents

13:19

reelect, I think you were using DNC ads,

13:21

I think they were technically not re-election ads.

13:23

Yes. But if I recall in the fall

13:25

of 95, at the

13:28

time, you know, you looked

13:30

at your polls and you're like, these aren't

13:32

numbers that win re-election, these are numbers that

13:34

you lose re-election and you wanted to move

13:36

the needle early, defined goal early, before you

13:38

even finished his primary. You

13:42

know, what's interesting is that I feel like you guys were more aggressive

13:44

in the fall of 95 than the Biden campaign was

13:46

in the fall of 23. Well,

13:49

so let's take a step back, Chuck, and I

13:51

think what I'm getting ready to

13:54

say, I think applies in sporting events as

13:56

well as campaigns. If you think about any

13:58

single football game. At

14:00

any sporting event, there are

14:03

two or three decisive moments that

14:06

determine the outcome of the game. And

14:08

some of the time when you're watching it in real time, you

14:12

know in real time that that was the

14:14

moment. You saw the moment. Sure. Or

14:16

even in a play of basketball happens all the

14:18

time. That three-pointer, that's the dagger. So

14:20

now if you go back and look at elections, you

14:23

can point after the campaign to where

14:25

were the decisive moments that decided the

14:28

election. So in the 96th campaign that

14:30

you mentioned, the

14:32

decisive moment in that campaign was the fall of 95.

14:35

And it was around the budget shutdown. And

14:38

we spent a lot of money around

14:41

that defining, we called it Gingrich-Dole. So

14:43

we wanted Dole to be defined by Gingrich. If

14:45

you look at the Gallup poll numbers in

14:48

January of 96 and

14:51

then compared them to the election

14:53

day, vote, they were identical. If

14:56

you go back to the 2004. Oh,

14:58

I remember, by the way, I remember focus group anecdotes

15:00

where people thought it was a Dole-Gingrich ticket. Your

15:03

ad campaign was so effective, people were

15:06

like, oh, it's Dole-Gingrich versus Clinton-Gort. So

15:08

if you go to the 2004 Bush

15:10

reelect, that election was decided March

15:12

of 2004 when Kerry is

15:16

trying to wrap up the nomination and the

15:18

Bush guys dropped hundreds, tens of millions of

15:20

dollars on TV ads defining

15:22

Kerry as a foot clock. If

15:25

you go back in the 2016 election,

15:27

I think it was decided in the last 10 days or 12 days,

15:30

which is very unusual, by the way. Most

15:32

elections are decided before everyday. So

15:35

every election has a defining moment.

15:37

I think that if you were asked

15:40

me if I were

15:42

gone and we're just coming in, or maybe

15:44

back to you now, if I were

15:46

waking up in the middle of October in

15:48

a coma, from a coma, and

15:51

I just woke up from a coma, there

15:53

are only two questions that

15:56

I want answers to. If you come in and answer those two

15:58

questions, I'll tell you who's going to win. The

16:00

first is I want to know what the campaign is about It's

16:04

a referendum on Biden's presidency. He's going to arrest

16:06

the referendum right now At least you know comparing

16:08

the buying president Trump rises those It's

16:11

a referendum about two visions from future 5050

16:14

and if it's a referendum on Biden

16:16

on Trump then Biden's gonna win So

16:19

there were two things I want to know one is

16:22

what's the campaign about and I think this is

16:24

a period of time Where

16:26

I think Biden get the higher ground

16:28

on winning that argument about what is

16:30

his campaign about? And by

16:32

the way, the dirt is a little thinking about Trump who I think

16:35

has a very good chance of winning by the way Is

16:38

he hasn't really campaigned? at

16:41

all in this election cycle He

16:43

had very few events during the primaries

16:46

He you know forget about going to 99 counties in

16:48

Iowa that he didn't go to five counties in

16:50

Iowa. He very few events his

16:53

Crowds he hopes a beautiful

16:56

event. He had that event in South Carolina in

16:58

that small town, which was spectacular But

17:00

he hasn't had many events a lot of his

17:03

events have not been you know, well attended He's

17:07

not campaigning much he now he's stuck in

17:09

a courtroom. So this period of time For

17:12

Biden, I think between now and and you

17:14

know I'm sure that trouble goes through a

17:17

long period of dominating the news by who's

17:19

gonna pick his VP But

17:21

prior in this window right now It's

17:24

what's two most important things for buying to

17:26

do one is I think they get the high

17:28

ground on defining what this campaign is about The

17:31

other is back to your 95 96 and it

17:33

was true for Obama This

17:36

is the most important period of time for

17:38

a president seeking reelection To let

17:41

his numbers up in terms of his

17:43

approval in direction of the country You

17:46

need it it's almost more

17:48

important that in a positive trendline

17:52

Than what the numbers are and those in Carter and

17:54

80 and Bush in 92 They

17:57

were cratering in the wrong direction

17:59

from January that year. So these are

18:01

the two most important things for Biden

18:03

right now. And the other thing, just to finish my

18:05

point. So the one thing is I want

18:07

to know when I come on my coma is what's

18:09

the campaign about? And the other is what's going on

18:11

in these swing states. And that's it. All

18:14

right. I'm going to do a fun little question that

18:16

Amy Walter did to me a few podcasts ago, which

18:19

is I can you can only

18:21

get the results of one battleground state. Yes,

18:24

again. Interesting.

18:27

My first answer was Wisconsin. My second

18:29

answer, my second answer was

18:31

Michigan. Why Michigan? And why not

18:34

Wisconsin? That would be my question. Why

18:36

Michigan over Wisconsin? So well,

18:38

the short answer, and I can talk. Assuming that

18:40

you agree with me that those are the two

18:42

that you want to know first. Well, you know,

18:44

we talk more broadly than I'll come to your

18:46

specific question. So more broadly, there are buckets of

18:48

seven swing states, three in the Midwest,

18:50

and three in the Sunbelt. And,

18:53

the so-called Blue Wall, which

18:56

crated in 16 for

18:59

Clinton in Pennsylvania, Michigan,

19:02

Wisconsin. I

19:04

think that is by far Biden's best path

19:07

to win. And if he carries those. Dirty little secret,

19:09

it might be his only path. I

19:12

mean, ironically, it might be the only I don't know

19:14

if he can win a Sunbelt state. I

19:16

am skeptical that he can, but he might. Well,

19:19

and just, you know, he's

19:21

got a couple problems in the Sunbelt. One is

19:23

historically, these states have not voted for

19:25

Democrats until 2020. And

19:27

the other is the reason that he was able to

19:30

bend that curve was his support with non-whites and young

19:32

people. And those are the people who think that, as

19:34

you know, the biggest hit then

19:36

in terms of his election results in

19:38

current polling. Just quickly on the

19:40

Sunbelt, and then I'll go back to your question. By

19:42

the way, no Mark Kelly and no Raphael Warnock on

19:44

the ballots in 2020, in either

19:46

Arizona or Georgia. I don't think that's insignificant.

19:49

I think that's a significant piece of data.

19:51

Right. And I would add in the case

19:53

of Georgia, and as

19:55

you say, in all elections, presidential

19:59

candidates. have, they

20:02

tend to do better in some

20:04

states than others. Like, North Carolina

20:06

never liked the Clintons, for instance. Illinois

20:10

always liked the Clintons. So

20:12

they overperformed. Well, New Hampshire is a classic

20:14

example. Yes. New Hampshire loved

20:16

the Clintons. Right. Didn't always love

20:18

some of these other Democratic candidates. Right. But

20:21

in Georgia, they really don't like Trump. Right.

20:23

And that was the cause for them to win

20:25

three Senate races, you know, 2020 and 2022. The

20:32

path that he could pull it off

20:34

is Arizona and Nevada because of abortion being on

20:37

the ballot. But that's

20:39

it. But I don't

20:41

see how he can win without

20:45

winning Pennsylvania, just on the map. If

20:48

Trump carries North Carolina and Georgia

20:50

plus his base states, if he

20:52

wins Pennsylvania, the election's over. But

20:56

I'd go back then to those three industrial

20:58

states is the key. And

21:00

I think

21:02

if you see what's going on, Michigan or

21:05

Wisconsin is changing. Dane

21:07

County, which is now

21:09

really the center around Madison, is really where most

21:11

of the votes are coming from. It's no longer

21:13

around Milwaukee. And the economy

21:15

is doing better in Wisconsin. If

21:17

you look at the polling, then it is in most of the

21:19

other states. So I think

21:22

Michigan, which Michigan

21:25

is the first time since the

21:27

mid 1980s, first time Democrats control

21:29

the governorship as well as state

21:31

legislature. They've had three. They've

21:34

had three really strong

21:36

cycles in a row, laterally.

21:40

And several of the political

21:42

prognosticators at the beginning of 2023

21:47

considered Michigan a lean Democratic

21:49

state on their maps. Now,

21:52

it's not. And I think it's I think it's two

21:55

main reasons why one is obviously

21:57

the war in Gaza and

21:59

the 300. people

22:03

in Michigan, they're Arab. And

22:05

it's also a pretty large Jewish

22:07

population, some of which are unhappy.

22:09

So the first issue in Michigan, which

22:11

is why Michigan is harder than Wisconsin,

22:14

I think is the war. And then the second though, is if you look

22:16

at the polling in these swing

22:19

states, Michigan, the

22:21

perception of the economy in Michigan

22:24

is both in terms of how it's going in Michigan and how

22:26

it's going in the rest of the country, lags

22:29

behind all the

22:32

other swing states. And then lastly, I do

22:34

think Trump is making some headway, both

22:37

literally as an

22:39

expression of priorities

22:42

going after Biden on electric vehicles. Now,

22:45

if you look at the fine print and

22:47

the UAW contracts are initiated, the

22:49

workers are protected from

22:51

for me, the facts don't matter. Yeah,

22:54

people don't know that. But

22:58

I think it's an expression of trying

23:00

to put some distance between working class

23:03

voters and Biden

23:05

and the elites and their priorities. So that's

23:08

for all those reasons. I

23:10

think it's going to be harder in

23:12

Michigan than Wisconsin. Obviously,

23:14

it's all about where

23:17

is 47% of winning number. And

23:20

I say this for both of

23:22

them. Right? If 47% can be

23:25

a winning number, Biden can carry North Carolina. If 47% is

23:27

a winning number, Trump

23:29

wins Wisconsin, Trump wins Michigan at 47.

23:33

Obviously, making that a winning number has

23:35

to do with the third party candidates.

23:39

Were you surprised at how decisively

23:41

we had the multi-candidate field in

23:43

our poll, we showed a distinct

23:45

advantage for Biden. I mean, it

23:48

was two to one basically

23:51

taking from Trump. And

23:54

it's clear RFK is upside down among Democrats

23:56

and right side up among Republicans. I mean,

23:58

it is. There's a lot

24:00

of reasons to show that it looks like he

24:04

is more of a factor for

24:06

right of center potential sort

24:10

of hold your nose voters than

24:12

either progressives or left of center.

24:17

If you're Biden campaign, do you

24:20

start to play games with that or not? Well,

24:24

I'll give you one factor. I'll answer your question. The

24:26

fact of it is that in

24:28

2016 and 2020, Georgia

24:32

is the only state that Trump carried where

24:34

he got 50% of voter more. The

24:36

only state in two election cycles. So

24:39

I go back to your 47, which I

24:41

believe is operational for Trump, but not

24:43

Biden. In other words, I think

24:45

Trump is the person who

24:47

needs 47 more than Biden. And

24:52

I'm skeptical of your poll. I'm

24:56

a believer – I believe that

25:00

multi-can't party candidates obviously got

25:02

Joe Stein and whatever. I think

25:04

Kurt Biden. And I'm

25:06

skeptical – All anti-incumbent? I mean, is

25:09

it – because I – look, I

25:11

go back and forth, right? There's this

25:13

mindset that the anti – if

25:16

you're splitting an anti-incumbent vote that can

25:18

sometimes help the incumbent, right? You're

25:21

splitting if it's, quote, anti-incumbent.

25:24

There's another idea that obviously there's

25:26

this anti-Trump coalition you want to build, which

25:29

is obviously what –

25:31

how the Biden folks see it, and

25:33

I'm guessing how you see it. But

25:36

I just wonder, are we just over-presuming that

25:38

because of what happened in 2016 and 2020?

25:42

Well, we may be over-overly

25:44

presuming that, although on my over and under,

25:46

I'll take the under on that. And

25:49

I think that – and it's not just because

25:51

Biden is the guy sitting in the office and

25:54

Trump is the challenger. I

25:56

think that Biden is, for

25:59

purposes for almost – Americans a member of

26:01

the incumbent party in

26:03

terms of the establishment and more of

26:05

how it's done stuff. And I

26:07

think that Trump is an insurgent candidate

26:09

and third, fourth and fifth party

26:12

cant rotors, I

26:15

think are much more aligned with the

26:17

insurgent based candidacies than establishment days. And

26:20

so I am very skeptical

26:22

of your poll in terms

26:24

of those numbers being

26:27

as overwhelming against Republicans.

26:31

But doesn't it make sense that if

26:34

Kennedy is an insurgent, is

26:36

there an argument to be made that Biden actually

26:38

wants some of those insurgent

26:40

voters not to vote for Trump and

26:43

whatever it takes for them to keep them from Trump? Well,

26:48

of course, yes, of course that's the case. If

26:52

you take Kennedy's crazy

26:54

stuff out of the equation, his

26:57

environmental message, his

27:01

economic messages, I think

27:03

resonate with a lot of... Well,

27:06

I do agree. If Kennedy took

27:08

his candidacy as seriously as voters would like to,

27:10

he could really do something here. But

27:14

luckily for Biden, he doesn't seem to want to take

27:16

his own candidacy very seriously sometimes. Well, we'll

27:18

have to say the big issue for him is whether he's going to be on the ballot

27:20

or not. And I think that's a big deal. I

27:22

guess I'll put you differently. If

27:26

you said to me, Biden and

27:29

Trump, which one

27:31

is to be harder to get above 47? I would say it

27:34

would be harder for Trump to get above 47. Do

27:37

you look at it... Because I do look at these swing

27:39

states and I just think that the

27:42

hold your nose voter is slightly... The makeup of

27:44

each of them. And maybe this is what we'll

27:46

learn over the next four months, right? Which is

27:48

the people, the double haters. The

27:51

double haters in North Carolina, particularly military

27:53

veterans, strike me as

27:55

people that will never vote for Biden. But

27:58

if you get him to vote for Kennedy... then like I

28:00

see North Carolina as the one place

28:02

where Biden can play that game. Maybe

28:05

even arguably in Arizona, where you have sort

28:07

of a libertarian type

28:09

of voter that doesn't, that maybe doesn't

28:12

like Trump, a retired veteran that

28:14

doesn't like his commander in chief stuff.

28:17

Um, but then I

28:19

also accept the premise that, Hey, that the, the,

28:21

the whole, the double haters in, in Michigan and

28:23

Wisconsin probably lean left. Well,

28:26

but just by the way, in 2022 in Arizona, 40% of

28:28

the people who voted and

28:31

self-identified as political independents. And

28:34

I think as you move, you know, west

28:36

of the Mississippi, you on

28:38

a variety of issues, starting with, you know, how

28:40

you vote and when you vote. Um,

28:43

but also I think there's much, you know,

28:45

much less tethered to the political parties, people

28:47

who live west of Mississippi. Um,

28:50

so, you know, one of the

28:52

lessons that people learned in 2016 was, uh,

28:55

uh, if you vote for

28:57

third, fourth and fifth parties, um,

29:00

you're wasting your vote if

29:03

you really have a strong opinion about who you don't want

29:05

to become president. So I think the

29:07

polls and it's historically showing that

29:09

you certainly saw this in 80

29:12

with, uh, the McCarter race, you saw it in 92th

29:14

row. You know, three party

29:16

candidates who are poll a lot stronger between

29:18

now and Labor Day than they generally do

29:20

in the fall. Well, and to me, the

29:22

only thing that matters here is whether Kennedy

29:24

gets himself into the debates. Cause if he

29:26

gets himself into the debates, then suddenly it's

29:28

a different situation. Go back to 96. Did

29:33

you guys want Perot in the debates or not? Well,

29:38

I think the, I think the real

29:40

question, which I wasn't there for, um,

29:43

was the 92 campaign. I

29:46

think that was going to be hard to keep them out of

29:48

cause of how high he'd been polling 96 was

29:51

a different story. That's why I was, you know,

29:53

Yeah, I, I, I don't recall it frankly being

29:55

a big issue. Uh, and I

29:57

think probably just because of the, you know,

30:00

That was more of a top-down command and

30:02

control operation where the

30:04

debate commission kind of ran everything

30:06

and you didn't even get to... And you

30:08

didn't have to... Well, there was nothing you could object to or you

30:11

didn't feel like you could. Right. And I

30:13

don't recall... His numbers were... I don't remember.

30:15

I think maybe 15% might have been the threshold I

30:17

don't even remember, but he was generally 9 or 10.

30:23

Looking back, did Perot in

30:25

96, forget 92, do you

30:29

think Perot hurt Dole more than it

30:31

hurt Clinton? That more Perot voters,

30:33

if it was a two-way ballot, probably would have... It

30:35

had been probably a 52-47. Well,

30:38

just as sort of as in a by the

30:40

way, I did not work on

30:42

the 92 campaign, but I

30:44

do know that the President Clinton

30:47

on down were very sensitive that

30:50

they were carrying places like Georgia and

30:53

Ohio and didn't want to be perceived

30:55

that the only reason they won those was because Perot

30:57

was on the ballot. In

31:00

96, I think what happened there, and I

31:02

think it did matter to the

31:04

President, was the election

31:06

was kind of over before it started. And

31:09

I think there was a real desire

31:12

to hit 50% of the

31:14

vote. And

31:17

I think that for a

31:20

lot of people towards the end of that campaign

31:22

who were not enthusiastic about

31:24

Clinton and felt that

31:29

you've got a free vote, a

31:31

pass, you can vote against, you can not

31:33

vote for Clinton and not worry about the outcome.

31:36

So I think it probably... Remember, there were a couple

31:38

of campaign finance stories that hit like mid-October. Yes. That

31:41

when I've talked to Clinton, people who are like, that

31:43

cost us the one percentage point, that cost us 50%.

31:47

I think it reminded people of...

31:50

You know, if you think about in politics

31:52

when there's a negative attack against someone, the

31:55

probability of it having

31:57

an impact is if

31:59

it reinforces... in existing pre-existing

32:02

negative view about it. And

32:04

so I think that that campaign

32:06

finance related issue that came at the end

32:08

kind of reinforces some people,

32:11

the slick willy, cutting corners. So

32:13

it had more of an impact. Do

32:16

you buy this idea that the

32:18

down ballot races in particularly Nevada,

32:21

Wisconsin, even North Carolina and Arizona,

32:24

that there's a reverse coattail effect that helps

32:27

Biden? I think it could be as

32:29

a poll that just came out North

32:31

Carolina, which shows the governor's race widening.

32:34

I think Robinson's

32:36

a disaster for the Republicans. I think

32:39

that I was not a bad believer that North

32:41

Carolina could be carried by Biden, but you throw

32:43

him an abortion and you're like, well, that's how

32:45

it happens. Right? Like if Biden

32:47

does carry North Carolina, they needed two things

32:49

to happen and they got them both.

32:52

Right. And I think even by MAGA

32:54

standards, this guy's crazy. So

32:56

that's your question. I think it has, I believe

33:01

for a reason we discussed at the top

33:04

of this, I believe it

33:06

can have an impact, particularly in North

33:08

Carolina, maybe in Nevada, in that

33:11

it's more about turnout. So in other words, people

33:14

might be more motivated to

33:16

vote in North Carolina because of the governor's

33:18

race than

33:20

trying to motivate them to vote for Biden. But

33:23

if you've got those people to come out to vote because

33:25

of the governor's race, they're going to vote for Biden. So

33:27

I think if this were election

33:30

like 2020, in which there's a lot

33:32

of energy, a lot of enthusiasm about voting.

33:34

You wouldn't need to worry about it, right? Yeah. So

33:37

I think because of the potential for this

33:39

turnout problem for both parties,

33:42

I remember, I think, just remember, by

33:44

the way, again, going back to how politics has changed

33:46

since you and I started, until

33:49

recently in all of our historical life,

33:52

off-year elections benefited the Republicans

33:54

and presidential years, Democrats. Super

33:57

voters have changed. One of the more

33:59

interesting things. things that our pollsters put together, we

34:01

asked them to do this. And

34:03

I assume this won't surprise you. You may have seen

34:06

it, Kornacki put it at the tail end of our

34:08

newsletter yesterday. But if you

34:10

look at the 2022 electorate, Biden's up five.

34:12

If you look at it through the 2020

34:14

electorate, Trump's up, excuse

34:16

me, Biden's up nine, Trump's up five. And

34:18

if you look at it through people that didn't vote in either 2020 or 2022, they

34:20

prefer Trump

34:23

by 23 points. The point

34:25

is, it

34:27

goes to this issue of it's

34:29

actually Republicans who need

34:31

the higher turnout. They need casual voters to

34:33

come in. The Democrats have the super

34:35

voters now. You're

34:37

right. Although Democrats

34:40

do have

34:43

a 2020 base problem of

34:45

these groups of people that voted 60% or more

34:48

for Biden, which is young people and

34:50

Hispanics. For blacks, it was

34:52

88% or whatever percent. There's

34:55

a dual challenge there, which is why I'm skeptical

34:57

of your poll. One is, are they

35:00

going to vote? And two is, I do believe Kennedy

35:02

can make real interesting. I'll

35:04

pause there. We'll be right back with a lot more. Spectrum

35:14

Business knows small business owners have to

35:16

do it all. Get Spectrum One for

35:19

business. Just $49.99 a month for internet,

35:21

advanced Wi-Fi with Security Shield, and a

35:23

free mobile line for a year. Learn

35:25

more at spectrum.com/business. Restrictions apply. Service is

35:27

not available in all areas. Are

35:31

you ready for more? More

35:34

perspectives, more flexibility, more

35:36

opportunities, more education,

35:39

more training, more benefits, more possibilities,

35:41

more mentorship, more skills, more control,

35:43

more impact, more community, more connection.

35:48

Because in the Air Force Reserve, you

35:50

get all this and more. So

35:53

when you're ready, head to afreserve.com to

35:55

learn more and get started. You

36:02

know it's just anecdotally I've got a couple of parent

36:05

friends who've come up to me and said hey you

36:07

know my kids thinking about volunteering

36:10

for Kennedy you know in college campus or something

36:12

like that I said and I

36:14

said don't get upset about it. I

36:17

said guess what I was in

36:19

college during the pro here's I was interested

36:21

in pro too it's it's almost like that's

36:23

what college kids I don't like these establishment

36:25

parties let's stir the pot. It's actually you're

36:27

not wrong here and I could see if

36:30

Kennedy I think Kennedy has a charisma

36:33

problem he's not good

36:35

on the stump I don't know what it is with his

36:38

voice whatever it is it and

36:40

it's you know I know he's got some sort of I

36:43

don't know if it's a if it's

36:45

a mental thing or whatever it is

36:47

I don't know

36:50

if he's charismatic enough but boy the idea

36:52

of him I could see it

36:54

playing well in college campuses. Yeah

36:57

that's why I'm skeptical of your poll. I

37:00

hear you I hear you so it's a it's a

37:02

it's a fair point. A couple more

37:04

specific questions on swing states how

37:07

the hell the Democrats keep Nevada in their

37:09

column you when you look at Nevada and

37:11

I say this I just find it fascinating more

37:13

than any of the other battlegrounds Nevada is the

37:16

one that looks less like a

37:19

state Democrats can win than any other one in the

37:21

battleground at times right doesn't have

37:23

the high education so working class this obviously

37:27

that culinary union and the and the left

37:29

over read machine has certainly been a huge

37:31

factor there but doesn't that almost feel

37:34

inevitable that Nevada is going the other way. Yes

37:37

and I think I would just say two things

37:39

about that the first is that Democrats vote

37:42

totals in Nevada while they've carried the

37:44

state for the last four presidential elections

37:46

it's all been very narrow but in

37:48

the last four elections it's

37:51

gotten narrower and narrower so the trend lines

37:53

and then second what you alluded to which

37:55

I think is the single most

37:58

the best predictor of of how

38:00

a person is going to vote is your level of education. I

38:03

think I've sent you these charts I can show

38:05

you. If you look at, I think

38:08

it's 13 out of

38:11

the most 15

38:14

highly educated states all support Democrats,

38:17

and it's 14 out of 15

38:20

least educated support Republicans, and the

38:22

only state that's voted for

38:24

Democrats is Nevada. Nevada is

38:27

like there were 38 or something of

38:29

education levels, and the only

38:31

reason that we have seven battleground states,

38:33

the other six are all in the

38:35

middle on education levels. To

38:38

your point, everything about

38:40

Nevada suggests the other states, New

38:42

Mexico, that's in the border.

38:46

To me, all the signs suggest Nevada

38:50

is the future Republican

38:52

Party. There's no

38:54

doubt, but it is funny to watch that.

38:56

I remember in 04, right after the 04 election,

39:00

we did an analysis at hotline

39:02

of the on education, and at

39:04

the time, Bush, Kerry

39:07

carried eight of the top 10 education

39:10

states. The only two he didn't carry

39:12

were Virginia and Colorado, and it

39:14

was like, guys, this is

39:16

probably two states that should be in the

39:18

battleground, and obviously a

39:20

cycle later, they

39:23

basically spent a couple of cycles on the battleground,

39:26

and they've gone right past it, although I

39:28

think Virginia, it's funny you say this, I

39:31

think there are some states that are just anti-Trump, so

39:36

I think Virginia is one of these states that right

39:38

now Trump, just an unwinnable state for Trump, but

39:41

obviously Glenn Youngkin has proven it's not

39:43

unwinnable for Republicans. Trump's style

39:45

of Republicanism is just never going to play

39:47

there. Right, and I think if you want,

39:49

I'm from North Carolina, and

39:51

10 years

39:53

ago, I would have said to you, North Carolina by

39:55

now would be where Virginia is. That's what a lot

39:57

of people assumed, that it was going to keep. going

40:00

and it didn't. So the main

40:02

reason though has to do with both

40:05

the nature of Virginia and the nature of North Carolina.

40:07

So back to your point about Trump and Virginia. If

40:10

you compare the percent of

40:12

the vote totals of Virginia

40:15

now compared to 20 years

40:17

ago, it's overwhelmingly skewed now

40:19

towards Northern Virginia. And

40:21

so you have

40:23

a much higher educated group of

40:25

people who live in

40:27

Northern Virginia. They're much more culturally

40:30

sort of reflecting all

40:32

that. The reason North

40:34

Carolina has not become Virginia

40:37

in terms of being blue is the geographic

40:39

nature of the state. Despite

40:41

the fact that you have a high percentage of

40:43

black voters in the state, a

40:46

relatively high percentage of educated voters, the

40:50

state doesn't have one major

40:52

metropolitan area like Northern Virginia and

40:54

the people that live with it.

40:57

You have five different population centers in

40:59

North Carolina and a lot of the

41:01

people live in exurban areas outside

41:04

of those population centers. And as a

41:06

result of that, because you

41:08

look at the only swing voters in America

41:11

now are in suburbs. And so

41:13

the inner suburbs are overwhelmingly Democratic. The

41:16

outer suburbs are way more

41:18

Republican. And sort of the middle suburbs are

41:20

kind of the jump ball. North

41:22

Carolina has a lot more geographic areas

41:25

that are in the less populated

41:27

suburban areas, whereas Virginia is densely

41:29

populated. Are

41:31

you one of those that believes Georgia is

41:33

more likely to move faster towards the Democrats

41:35

than North

41:38

Carolina because of that? Because of that market

41:40

split up? I mean basically the

41:42

Atlanta suburbs are Northern Virginia, right? The movement

41:45

has been almost as fast as we saw

41:47

in Northern Virginia. I mean when I first

41:49

got to Northern Virginia, Fairfax County was a

41:51

swing county, right? I think Bush carried it

41:53

if I'm not mistaken in

41:55

1992 maybe even by a point or two. Well

41:59

just to be clear, If we were

42:01

talking 10 years ago, I would

42:03

have said demography is destiny. Yeah.

42:06

And I would say 10 years from

42:08

now, it should be now, North Carolina, a

42:11

democratic state, Georgia, be a lean

42:13

democratic state, Florida, be a

42:15

lean democratic state, Texas might be a complete.

42:18

But everything moves, but things change that

42:20

you don't realize. Like, look, if Trump's

42:23

a little less racist, if

42:25

people thought he was, you know, the perception

42:27

of him, he'd already have this multi-ethnic

42:31

working class coalition supporting him, don't

42:33

you think? Well, but

42:36

this coalition is moving to Republicans. Exactly.

42:41

It's moving there, which

42:43

is why I think these presumptions

42:45

on battleground states, well, it presumes,

42:47

we're presuming that somehow Democrats are

42:50

going to continue to win 90% of the black vote,

42:52

right, in the southern states. It's wrong. I don't think that's

42:55

going to be the case, right? Absolutely. And even more importantly,

42:57

Hispanics who have gone

43:00

from, you know, 60% Democrat to very... So

43:02

anyway, back to... Third generation Hispanics look like

43:04

white voters. Well, what you say in America...

43:06

Do you know what I mean by that?

43:08

A hundred... Right? Well, it's true. If you

43:10

go back to the last century, every

43:14

subsequent generation of people who migrated

43:16

here, immigrated here, right, Irish,

43:19

a Tyler, as you get the

43:21

second, third, fourth, and fifth generation, the further you

43:23

get away from your origin, the more they identify with

43:26

where they are in their new country, not where you

43:28

came from. So that's your question.

43:30

I think North Carolina and Georgia will probably be

43:33

on a parallel track. And I think they'll

43:36

probably be leading Republican for

43:38

a while. And, you

43:41

know, they're purple, but with a little bit more of a

43:43

red tint now. And I think

43:45

you'll stay in that same color bandwidth for the

43:47

next 10 years. I

43:49

feel like Florida and Texas

43:52

are too big to see

43:54

systemic movements. I

43:57

think before Democrats ever...

43:59

put them truly back in play in the case

44:02

of Florida or in play in the case of

44:04

Texas, they kind of need a

44:06

charismatic winner first. They kind

44:08

of need a proof of concept first, don't you think?

44:10

I agree. You grew up in Florida, right? I

44:13

did. I did. Bob Graham

44:15

was a proof of concept, right? He just, you know, it was,

44:18

there were certain characters, you know, it's so funny. Graham,

44:21

Bill Nelson, Lott and Childs. Boy, they all,

44:23

you start to ask yourself, well, those are

44:25

the guys that won statewide in Florida basically

44:27

my entire lifetime. And you know the

44:29

people that didn't win? They

44:32

didn't look and sound like them. Yeah,

44:34

although I'm quite skeptical that

44:37

if any of them ran, just say them,

44:39

but if any of them wouldn't win. And

44:42

I... I don't think any of them would get

44:44

their own nomination. Right. Anyway, we can... Well,

44:46

that kind of matters too. But I

44:49

would dissemble Texas from Florida. I

44:52

think Florida, you know, you've

44:54

got these, I don't know if you saw it, I can't remember it's

44:57

called Move Right, but you've got real estate agents now in

44:59

Texas and Florida who are recruiting

45:01

Republicans in blue states to

45:04

move to red states. This

45:06

self-sorting is real. Yeah. This

45:08

is a real thing that's going on. Look, I'm taking my

45:10

son around to college campuses and running the parents and parents

45:13

are making political decisions based

45:16

on where they... I, you know, I can

45:18

sort of hear the conversation. Some

45:20

of them recognize me and volunteer the conversation to

45:22

me. And so I

45:25

think you probably, Bill Bishop wrote a book 20

45:28

years ago about the coming of

45:30

self-sorting. But I think Florida is different.

45:32

So you've got, you

45:34

know, back in the 90s, we

45:36

were getting close to parity, Democrats with

45:39

Cuban voters because of the younger

45:41

Cuban voters. There is a third generation.

45:43

It's the whole, what we just discussed.

45:45

By the third generation, they think more

45:48

or less about their ethnic origins and more

45:50

about their current status. That's not happening

45:53

now in Florida because you've got... Well,

45:55

Bernie Sanders screwed that up. I'm sorry. He

45:57

just did. He screwed it up. You

46:00

got Cuba's, you got 300,000 Venezuelans. You

46:03

have people who... And the S-word

46:05

is a problem. Socialism is

46:08

a problem and Bernie Sanders and Andrew

46:10

Gillum. I mean, you know, it's

46:12

so funny, a butterfly flaps its wings. If

46:15

Bernie Sanders doesn't get involved in that

46:18

Democratic primary, Gwen Graham is a two-term

46:20

governor of Florida. I agree, but understand,

46:22

you're right, but understand when

46:24

you say socialism in

46:28

Illinois or Wisconsin, they're

46:32

talking about taxes. When you

46:34

talk about socialism in

46:36

Florida, you're talking about

46:38

Maduro and Castro. So

46:41

I think when you look at what's

46:44

happening in Florida, between the Hispanic vote,

46:47

people who are moving there for

46:49

tax reasons and people who are

46:51

moving there for political reasons, I'm

46:54

very skeptical of the Democratic party

46:56

future in Florida. Four-term

46:58

or longer, well, I mean, I know I was

47:00

joking with somebody. The worst thing that happened to

47:03

Democrats was putting an abortion measure

47:05

on the ballot this cycle. Because

47:08

if you had the abortion issue as a way

47:10

to run for governor in 26, and I actually

47:16

think the best thing to happen to Florida

47:18

Republicans is if the voters codify this themselves,

47:23

which probably is going to happen. And

47:26

then they probably don't, they'll

47:28

have some losses over this, but it

47:30

won't be as bad if they had

47:32

to directly answer for their vote. This

47:36

referendum could bail out the Florida Republicans. I

47:38

completely agree. Worst thing for Florida Republicans would

47:40

be for Trump to win, and

47:43

they had that ballot initiative in 26. That

47:45

would be the nightmare. By the way, is it

47:47

almost inevitable that the party that wins the presidency

47:49

is just going to

47:54

get clobbered in 26? That it's just

47:56

going to be such a, it feels like such

47:59

a, it doesn't matter. if it's Dems, you

48:01

know, Biden wins, it is going to be a

48:03

killing fields for the Democrats and literally vice versa

48:05

of Trump wins. Well, that's right. But I don't

48:08

want to go off too far in a

48:10

tangent, but we're going through an historic change

48:13

in our country from a 20th

48:15

century manufacturing top down economy to

48:17

a 21st century digital global one.

48:19

The last time we went through something like this was the

48:22

end of the 1800s. We moved

48:24

from an agorian society to really. You know,

48:26

we had five straight presidentials that were decided

48:28

by five points or less from 1868 to

48:30

1892. And

48:33

then we didn't have, then we only had five in

48:36

the next hundred years decided by

48:38

five points or less until this

48:41

century. Right. So we're going through

48:43

the same kind of, what's

48:45

that not generation, what's

48:47

a hundred year transition. And

48:50

we're in the middle of it right now. And

48:53

so 10 out of the last 12 election

48:55

cycles, the country's voted out

48:57

either. Some change. The president, the House

48:59

was set. So we're going to continue

49:02

probably at least to the end of this decade.

49:05

And if you take the sweep of history in 20, 30

49:07

years, that's really nothing. But when you're

49:09

living through most of your professional career, you've

49:12

been living in the middle of this, this

49:14

mouse room. Feels like, you

49:16

know, forever. So I do think whoever's

49:18

in power in this transition is

49:21

going to pay the price. And the other thing

49:23

that I think is likely to happen, the losing party is

49:25

going to fracture. The question is

49:27

how badly there'll

49:29

be an internal fight. The other

49:31

thing that happened over a hundred years ago is we actually

49:34

had a lot of small parties form, right? You'd

49:36

have certain things like the silver party and you'd have

49:38

all these different parties that formed in

49:40

that same period during that tumultuous.

49:45

You know, obviously the Democrats have been held

49:47

together by Trump. And if

49:49

that suddenly goes away, you're going to see

49:51

this big fracture. And

49:54

obviously the Liz Janies of the world are itching for a

49:56

fight on the right over what

49:59

conservatism is. Do

50:01

you expect the fights to stay within the

50:03

party or do you expect attempts that sort

50:05

of, well, let's start a new

50:07

conservative party. Let's start a new liberal party. So

50:10

I don't agree with what you said, which I'll

50:12

come back to your last point. There's

50:14

nothing that says we have to lug these political

50:16

parties around for the rest of our lives. If

50:19

you look at that, you know, when

50:21

you and I are growing up, if you look at the institutions

50:26

that ran retail, you

50:28

know, these department stores, they're all gone now.

50:33

And if you look at the fracturing of media outlets, so

50:35

I believe we will

50:37

have a conservative party, a liberal party, a progressive whatever,

50:39

but I don't think that's going to happen for another

50:41

10 or 15 years. But here's

50:43

why I disagree with your observations. I

50:47

believe that the Republican Party has completed

50:49

largely its transition. It is now the

50:52

party of Trump. They're done.

50:55

Yes. And it will remain the party

50:57

of Trump when he wins or loses. If you look at,

51:00

you know, I don't know what your math is. Politico

51:02

came out with, they claimed there are only 30 marginal

51:05

lawsuits now at 435. Cook

51:09

has got around 45. The

51:11

point is 92, 94%

51:14

of the congressional districts are not competitive. And

51:18

whether you're a Democrat or Republican, you have

51:20

a far better chance of losing in a

51:22

primary than in general. So I

51:25

don't see how even a

51:27

Trump light right now could survive.

51:30

You mentioned about, you know, Bob Graham couldn't win

51:33

a primary. I was thinking earlier

51:35

when you were talking about Mitch Daniels is a

51:37

non-starter in Indiana. He can't possibly win a primary.

51:39

They had a talk amount of running for the

51:41

Senate. They're like, don't do it. You're going to

51:43

lose the primary. You don't embarrass yourself. So I

51:45

disagree with you both on the Democrat and Republican

51:47

side. So just to finish on the Republican side.

51:50

You believe the two parties will

51:52

be just simply what

51:54

your sounds like you're saying between how

51:57

closely divided the House will be, how closely

51:59

divided the Senate will be that in some ways

52:01

the vehicles are too important? No.

52:04

I think that the

52:06

structure of our politics currently makes

52:11

it impossible to be a moderate. Now, I

52:13

want to combat that as a Democrat, but

52:15

just to finish, the core

52:18

problem right now in our political system is

52:20

we have the wrong reward system. Right.

52:23

The incentives only... Right. The

52:25

moderates don't know how to have a positive impact. Well,

52:27

they can't because of the structure of the reward system,

52:29

but it's changing slowly. So

52:32

when you have jungle primaries in California or

52:35

rank choice voting in Maine or Alaska,

52:38

all of a sudden the incentives change. All of a

52:41

sudden you have to get moderate voters. If

52:43

you look at Northern Virginia, the

52:45

former Congresswoman

52:50

who got beat... What's her name? It used to

52:54

be Wexin C. Oh, Comstock, Barbara Comstock. Yeah, but she was a

52:56

raging right-wayer in the 90s. Yeah. Why does

52:58

she change? The Clinton people. She changed. Right.

53:01

She was truly... Didn't she work

53:03

for Dan Burton? Yeah. She's part of

53:05

that world. I think that was deposed by her. But

53:12

she became a raging moderate. And

53:16

why she became a raging moderate? Because her

53:18

district changed. Anyway, we are changing the reward

53:20

system. You're seeing it everywhere. Oregon's for the

53:22

put-in-rank choice, Nevada. So it's going to take

53:24

a while. So

53:27

right now there are barriers to

53:29

entry to change the reward system. But

53:31

it's changing. But to me, the Republicans, it's

53:34

a done deal. You

53:37

have to be Trumpy enough

53:39

or you can't be a

53:41

nominee. The party's more likely to go to a JD

53:44

Vance than it is to go to... Portman.

53:47

Yeah, Rob Portman. But maybe at 70-30. It wouldn't be at

53:49

55-45. Right. Last question. I

53:53

just want you to... I

53:56

disagree with you on the Democrats. I don't care if Biden wins. the

54:01

future of the Democratic Party is going

54:04

to begin the day after the November

54:06

elections. The Democrats have been controlled by

54:09

Bill and Hillary Clinton and

54:11

the Obama Biden administration for 25

54:13

years. For the last

54:16

eight years, the

54:18

only organizing principle of the

54:20

Democratic Party was to beat

54:22

Trump. And the Democratic Party is

54:24

a federation. It's really not a party.

54:26

It's a federation of interest, the choice community,

54:28

the labor community, environmental community, the civil

54:31

rights community. And so you're going

54:33

to have a, I don't care what happens, and

54:36

whether Trump or Biden wins or loses, you're going

54:38

to have a fight in terms of generational

54:41

change. It's been 25 years since we've

54:43

had it. And in terms of

54:45

the liberals, the deal the Democrats passively cut

54:47

was, the agreement was,

54:49

okay, in the area of Trump, we're

54:51

going to run moderate candidates, but the progressives get

54:54

to dominate the positions that these candidates take. That's

54:56

going to be over. The day after the primary,

54:58

you're going to have a brawl for the future

55:00

of the Democratic Party. And it's going to be

55:02

big, and it's going to be messy. And just

55:04

what you think it'll be public, just like 89

55:06

and 90 and Ron Brown and Bill Clinton yelling

55:09

at each other, and then becoming friends at the

55:11

end, right? Probably 85. Yeah, not more 85, the

55:13

start of the

55:18

deal. So we're going to start this

55:21

conversation publicly,

55:24

that political leadership has been a quarter of a

55:26

century. And for policy discussions, it's

55:29

been eight years ahead. So it's going to

55:31

be an explosion. The

55:35

last question is something Bill Backinterf, our Republican

55:37

pollster and I have been debating. And

55:40

that is, you know, one

55:43

of the, Peter Hart, for our

55:45

poll always, you know, had these great,

55:47

you know, what's the poll question we're going to wish we

55:49

asked that we didn't, you know, sort

55:51

of trying to think election day backwards. And

55:54

one of the things that Bill and I have come up with is, we're

55:57

all presuming that this race is going

55:59

to look like. exactly like 16 or

56:01

20. We just don't know which way it goes.

56:05

And actually, is it not more likely that

56:07

there is somehow there's a break one way

56:09

or the other? Do you think

56:11

it's more likely we see a repeat or

56:14

that if Trump wins, he wins the

56:16

popular vote? And if Biden wins, he wins by him. He

56:19

adds another state and it's, you know, North Carolina.

56:22

That we're more likely to see

56:24

that the variance of outcomes here

56:27

is perhaps wider than the conventional

56:29

wisdom is saying. I'd

56:32

say three things. First of

56:34

all, Bill McIntyre is probably one

56:36

of the best, not the best pollsters in the

56:38

United States. I, you know, I love to thorking

56:40

out. He and I love geeking out. Period. And

56:42

I only wish you were a Democrat. Secondly,

56:45

I think if Biden

56:47

wins, it'll probably be more on the

56:49

narrow, narrowish side. I think

56:51

that there's a possibility that Trump can win

56:55

and really kind of run

56:57

the table on these seven swings. It's more like

56:59

Carter, more like Reagan 80, that everything moves and

57:01

moves in the same direction. Yeah.

57:04

Because that's the thesis, Bill, and I were talking about. Remember in the

57:06

all through the early aughts, close

57:10

Senate races would all break the same direction. Everything

57:12

went 51-49, but one

57:14

party was on the 51. It wasn't,

57:16

they weren't breaking in different

57:18

directions. So that was our thesis here.

57:21

Could we actually be seeing that this

57:23

time? Well, but the problem about why

57:25

your thesis no longer works in the

57:27

Senate is it just

57:29

they've been on the educational levels of

57:31

the state and you get out of your boat. So

57:35

I guess the question, so the problem that guys

57:37

like you and I have, Chuck, is, you know,

57:39

there's an old saying about airline pilots. The best

57:41

ones aren't the ones who've been flying forever. I

57:43

think they know everything. And they're not the ones

57:45

who've just been starting out. They don't know what

57:47

they don't know. It's the ones who've been flying

57:49

long enough to know what they know, but haven't

57:51

been flying so long that they think

57:53

they know everything. And so the problem for

57:55

guys like you and me, we'll take the

57:57

22 election as an example, all

58:00

the traditional metrics that we relied on,

58:02

they were always right about

58:04

how the election is going to turn out. You

58:07

know, job approval, the incumbent president, all

58:09

that lit, negative stuff turned

58:12

out not to be a good

58:15

predictor of the outcome because the world

58:17

has changed. So back to your question,

58:19

what I don't even know how you

58:21

can ask it. But I

58:23

guess what I want to know at the end

58:25

of the day is what

58:28

was the single issue that I'm going

58:30

to come back to that word issue. What is

58:32

the single biggest issue that determined how you voted?

58:34

Now, if you take your poll and every other

58:36

poll, it's all

58:38

inflation, the economy,

58:41

and immigration. Well, it depends on

58:43

how you ask the question. We ask it two different

58:45

ways. And when you ask it more personally, abortion suddenly

58:47

pops up to the top, to

58:49

tide for the top versus the most important

58:52

issue of the country. Further and then through

58:54

those days as well. Okay. But

58:56

my point is if

58:59

that's going to be how it's determined,

59:01

unless something happens, substantial

59:04

change, Trump's

59:06

going to win. If you look

59:09

at those three issues, it's not like he's

59:11

nudging ahead of Biden on

59:13

the economy or these are

59:15

overwhelming numbers. But the

59:17

quote unquote issue that I

59:19

would like to figure out how you ask and put in

59:21

there, it's not just

59:23

the future of democracy because that actually

59:26

breaks 50-50 right now. It's

59:29

really whether Trump is the

59:31

biggest issue. So

59:33

to me, if you

59:35

add Trump, because if

59:37

you look at the results of 1820 and 22, what was the single most

59:41

important issue in the election? Basically Trump.

59:43

It was Trump. So I

59:45

want to know at the end of the

59:47

day, what is the most important issue?

59:49

And I'll give you abortion if

59:51

you want to put that in there. But it's Trump.

59:53

I want to know, you

59:56

got to figure out how to ask that question Where

59:58

you can. Process.

1:00:00

Whether or not it's not trusted. I was

1:00:03

a rule that. I've. Often looked

1:00:05

at these voters that the ones that that.

1:00:09

Are you Voting? Trains? Are you voting

1:00:11

on a transaction? Are you voting aspiration? Only

1:00:13

right? Are you voting on. It,

1:00:16

you know it's interesting to me when you look at the

1:00:18

Biden Trump comparisons. Trump wins on

1:00:20

all of the mechanic metrics of

1:00:22

the presidency meanings managing the economy,

1:00:25

managing the border, tough on foreign

1:00:27

policy, The. Only thing Biden

1:00:29

beats Trump on are basically the character stuff,

1:00:31

right? It's on in our i don't want

1:00:33

to put it this way, but it's basically

1:00:35

nobody wants Trump as their neighbor. But maybe

1:00:37

that's it. As far as Colonel Jessup said

1:00:40

in a few good men in deep down

1:00:42

and parties, you don't want to admit you

1:00:44

want me on that wall and that there's

1:00:46

a feat. There's those voters that are like

1:00:48

I don't like Trump's but you know I

1:00:50

want I want the a whole on the

1:00:52

wall of over there and that's your transactional

1:00:54

voter versus the one that says hey, what's

1:00:56

what is in the best interests of America.

1:00:59

You know I mean economy sucks and bidens

1:01:01

little to work for me but she's we

1:01:03

can't to have what Trump's having right. That

1:01:06

to me is more than aspiration of type

1:01:08

of of of decision maker and and vote

1:01:10

you're having and I just don't I think

1:01:12

most Americans are transactional France. Agrees

1:01:16

as they sell on e I was

1:01:18

thinking as before you answer the question

1:01:20

in touch on it as a this

1:01:23

is right. One. Of those

1:01:25

under reported aspects of of the selections

1:01:27

about and that is. That.

1:01:31

Are they get a word? With sharp as

1:01:33

an advantage of the biden right now. Is

1:01:36

is. With. Strong vs

1:01:39

Week. On. A percent and I

1:01:41

have identified as problem is he projects weakness as

1:01:43

and I say or maybe it's not fair, Maybe

1:01:45

his voice the gate, whatever you want to say

1:01:47

but A P projects weakness and that's I think.

1:01:50

I don't know how you pull it right back

1:01:52

there and I think that it's feel. As.

1:01:54

A What's happened in people's lives And. if

1:01:56

you're working. Classes started the early nineties

1:01:58

and. Fly. people, whether

1:02:00

it was 2008 crisis in the last decade,

1:02:03

or it's COVID. I think there's an overwhelming

1:02:05

sense in people's personal life that their life

1:02:07

is kind of out of control. They

1:02:11

don't feel like if they work hard, they're going to

1:02:14

get ahead. And I think

1:02:16

that there's also that feeling in a broader

1:02:18

sense that that's what's happening in

1:02:20

the world. And I do

1:02:22

think that for

1:02:25

Biden to shore up his deficits

1:02:27

with Trump, if this is

1:02:29

sound that who's strong and who's weak, strong

1:02:31

guys will win. Yeah. No,

1:02:34

it's, it's, it is

1:02:36

interesting. It's screaming at us. What do you make of

1:02:38

the fact that Trump

1:02:41

is successfully memory hold his leadership during

1:02:43

COVID in 2020? It

1:02:46

is not, I mean, I think it's

1:02:48

astonishing that none of that stuff's a negative, but

1:02:51

it seems it wasn't negative in 2020. So

1:02:53

why he lost the election, I'm convinced

1:02:55

of is his management of the, of

1:02:57

the pandemic. And yet it's been memory

1:02:59

hold. I agree with that.

1:03:02

You know, I just as a broader sense,

1:03:04

and I'll answer more specifically in a broader sense, you

1:03:06

know, now that we're like going back out

1:03:09

and we're going to concerts and life is

1:03:11

back to normal, I don't

1:03:13

think we have any idea how much

1:03:16

COVID has changed our society in our

1:03:18

lives and the long-term

1:03:21

implications of the, you know, divisions

1:03:23

between people who have money and

1:03:25

don't have money and, you know,

1:03:27

can remote vote work

1:03:29

remote and people who got

1:03:32

left behind by not going to

1:03:34

school, we'll, there'll be studying this

1:03:36

for generations about

1:03:38

the long-term impact of COVID and

1:03:40

how much it's impacted our society. And

1:03:43

I don't even think we've begun to stretch and

1:03:45

service that because superficially life is back to normal.

1:03:48

Um, but back to your specific

1:03:50

point, I

1:03:53

think people remember that essentially pre-COVID

1:03:55

post-COVID that, you know, everything

1:03:57

costs 20% more now than it did

1:03:59

pre-COVID. Food costs 29% more than before

1:04:01

pre-COVID. I

1:04:04

think that now that we have quote-unquote go

1:04:06

back to normal, I think

1:04:08

the way they're evaluating before and after is

1:04:11

based on how much

1:04:13

things cost. Now, even you

1:04:15

Chuck, you're part of the

1:04:17

majority of America that has never lived

1:04:21

in an inflationary period in your life. You've never seen

1:04:23

inflation before. Oh, no, I did in the 70s. I

1:04:26

remember that point. How old were you in 1980? Eight.

1:04:31

Well, you're six years old. Okay.

1:04:34

No, well, here's the thing. My first memories

1:04:36

of politics were 76, but

1:04:38

it was really the gas lines. Okay. Up,

1:04:41

it's odd number day, it's even number day and we

1:04:43

were always odd number day in our license plates in

1:04:45

order to get gas. That is a,

1:04:47

and I remember my parents, when

1:04:50

the interest rates fell below 12%, we could finally

1:04:52

get a house. We couldn't get a house. We lived

1:04:54

in an apartment building. Right. We lived

1:04:56

in a rental. I remember I was

1:04:58

in a job at a time of working class, my dad was unemployed,

1:05:01

my mom was working retail, and I remember

1:05:03

it was a celebration when interest

1:05:06

rates dropped below 12%. Well, it's just

1:05:08

two things. Remember when the, last year

1:05:10

when there was the hacking and

1:05:13

oil refinery, and we had the shortage

1:05:16

of gas? Yeah. I'm about 10 years older

1:05:18

than you. I had immediate flashbacks in the

1:05:20

70s, right? Yeah. But,

1:05:23

so I'll give you... And inflation,

1:05:25

inflation killed three presidencies in

1:05:27

the 70s. Right. I

1:05:29

mean, Nixon resigned. The

1:05:31

pressure on Nixon was real,

1:05:34

but if it had been a better economy,

1:05:36

we've always wondered would the pressure had been

1:05:38

there? Right. So,

1:05:40

I'll make my point, but I should not have included you in

1:05:42

this. So the point I was making

1:05:44

is that the majority

1:05:46

of Americans were

1:05:49

not alive or could

1:05:52

remember life

1:05:54

in 1981, 82, had the last inflation.

1:05:56

So the majority of Americans have never seen this

1:05:59

before. So it's hard

1:06:01

enough to deal with the shock of all this,

1:06:04

but if you've never seen it, it's even

1:06:06

harder. And so when you look at

1:06:08

pre-COVID, post-COVID, what does Trump get blamed for or whatever

1:06:10

or not, you're measuring

1:06:13

the fact that things cost 20%

1:06:15

more or more depending. If

1:06:18

you look at insurance, if you look at housing, it's

1:06:20

way more than 20%. And

1:06:23

while wages have gone up a little bit for

1:06:25

two years, inflation was higher than our wage increase.

1:06:28

So that's what they're measuring about a

1:06:30

before and after COVID. Right.

1:06:34

I've said last question 16 times. I

1:06:36

really mean it. We

1:06:39

both, I think, agree there's only seven states in the

1:06:41

battleground. But

1:06:43

I'm just curious, what's state number eight for you? And I'm

1:06:45

going to give you a choice of three. I'll give you

1:06:48

Minnesota. Oh, damn it. That's what I was going

1:06:50

to start with. Minnesota, New Hampshire,

1:06:52

Florida, and that's what I was wondering.

1:06:54

Minnesota feels like, but for the education

1:06:56

numbers, it would already be

1:06:59

Michigan. The only thing that keeps it from being

1:07:01

Michigan and Wisconsin are those education

1:07:03

numbers. But boy, they have

1:07:05

a bunch of progressives that'll flirt third party. That's

1:07:08

one of those where I just feel like the more candidates

1:07:10

that are on the ballot in Minnesota, the wackier things

1:07:12

could get. I completely agree. So,

1:07:16

well, that was fun. And

1:07:18

glad to know that our heads are in the

1:07:20

same place. More importantly, are you going

1:07:22

to do monthly? Am I going to get

1:07:24

monthly PowerPoints from you? I miss them. I

1:07:27

felt like you were on top of them

1:07:29

a couple cycles ago. Well, you know, the

1:07:32

dirty little secret is I

1:07:36

pretty much almost just put out

1:07:38

the same polls every month because

1:07:40

nothing's changed. So I

1:07:42

tend to put out stuff that

1:07:45

I feel like I have something to say. And

1:07:49

right now, I think we are

1:07:51

in a period, Chuck, I think it's quite interesting.

1:07:54

We're in this period, it's probably, it's

1:07:56

going to last a couple of months where

1:07:58

basically Trump has penned. down by his trial.

1:08:02

And, and he's not, as I

1:08:04

said earlier, it's not like he was campaigning all

1:08:06

over the place. And now he's not, he

1:08:08

hasn't been campaigning. But he's

1:08:10

really pinned down right now. And Biden

1:08:12

is working as aggressively as you can

1:08:14

to get back

1:08:17

what he lost since last November, which are

1:08:19

based basically based voters. And we're close to

1:08:21

where we've been, which is a 40 4444

1:08:23

country with

1:08:26

60% anxiety. I know,

1:08:28

but all that if the question is whether, all right,

1:08:30

so Biden caught up. Right.

1:08:33

But can he pull ahead? I don't know. He

1:08:35

might catch up. Oh, no, I

1:08:37

think it's all in the margin of error. But as I

1:08:39

would discuss, you know, the Electoral College

1:08:41

map favors Republicans. And

1:08:43

it doesn't mean Trump's gonna

1:08:46

win. But it means the

1:08:48

Secretary of Trump can win these Georgia

1:08:50

North Carolina, he's really got Biden

1:08:52

in a corner where he's only gonna get

1:08:54

19 electoral votes. And he has like five

1:08:57

great options to get there. Right.

1:08:59

No, it definitely feels as if Trump has more

1:09:01

paths. And I remember it felt

1:09:04

like a cycle ago, we said Biden had more

1:09:06

paths to 270 than Trump did. And I think

1:09:08

it's definitely flipped. And I think what's what's

1:09:10

making things harder in this

1:09:13

cycle compared to 20 is the

1:09:16

uncertainty about who's gonna vote. I

1:09:18

just think this in the third party, I just

1:09:20

think that, you know, in 2020,

1:09:23

it was in Trump was right, by the way, he's

1:09:25

like, I'm not, he didn't care about swing voters, he

1:09:27

just knew there are a ton of voters

1:09:29

that fit the profile that didn't vote that he

1:09:31

gets out to turn out the missing white vote

1:09:33

was real in 2012. 7 million

1:09:35

votes. That's right. There was a

1:09:37

missing white vote. So I think that

1:09:39

this is not the case necessarily. I

1:09:43

think this is the case about in

1:09:45

an election in which nobody wants

1:09:47

to see either of these candidates running. And

1:09:51

if you look at every metric of

1:09:53

people's political engagement, it's

1:09:55

down based on voting, it's down

1:09:58

based on political giving, it's It's

1:10:00

down based on watching cable television. It's down

1:10:02

based on... Every way you want to look

1:10:04

at it. Everywhere you look at it. And

1:10:06

so I think that's the great wild card

1:10:08

in this divided country now that we didn't

1:10:11

have in 2020. Yeah,

1:10:13

I know. So ironically, lower turnout,

1:10:15

higher variance in our

1:10:17

potential results. Mr. Sosnick, we

1:10:19

went an hour. That's fantastic. Thanks for the time,

1:10:21

my friend. Right say in your chat. Good

1:10:23

to see you too. Good to see

1:10:25

you too. In the Air

1:10:28

Force Reserve, you get more time to do more of what

1:10:30

you want. Want to finally start that new

1:10:32

business? Go for it. Is it

1:10:34

time to go back to school for that master's degree?

1:10:37

You got it. Need to move for a

1:10:39

new civilian career but still want to serve? That's

1:10:42

all you. Or do you want to serve while

1:10:44

being closer to family? Hey, more power to

1:10:46

you. The Air Force Reserve gives

1:10:48

you the control to really take your career

1:10:50

and life into your own hands. So when

1:10:52

you're ready for more, go to afreserve.com and

1:10:55

find out what more means to you. Well

1:10:58

there you go. If you're a junkie and

1:11:00

you love battleground map conversations, as

1:11:02

you can see there, I had 17 last

1:11:04

questions for Doug and he had – and hang

1:11:07

on, I'll answer your question and I have six

1:11:09

more ways to answer the question. We

1:11:11

could have kept going and going. So we'll have part two,

1:11:13

three, and four of this podcast down the road. So

1:11:17

I'm glad you enjoyed that. But before we

1:11:19

go, as I promised, a listener question here.

1:11:21

And this one is from Charlie in Berlin.

1:11:24

No, this is not a checkpoint Charlie

1:11:27

makeup thing. This really is

1:11:29

the guy's name's Charlie and he really is riding

1:11:31

from Berlin, Germany. And he says,

1:11:33

hey Chuck, I just listened to your episode with Max Frost. And

1:11:36

I found your discussion about congressional term limits

1:11:38

and House reform fascinating. In fact,

1:11:40

he said four-year long House terms is a neat

1:11:43

idea. That's what Max Frost was proposing. However,

1:11:45

I'm wondering why the framing of this topic

1:11:48

is always about a fixed number of terms

1:11:50

rather than a mandatory retirement age. The latter

1:11:52

mitigates institutional knowledge leaving Congress, assuming

1:11:54

a representative runs in every election until they age

1:11:56

out and doesn't lose an election or B doesn't

1:11:58

lose an election. there are some

1:12:00

perverse incentives. Get in early like your 30s and

1:12:02

you're set for light that don't

1:12:04

exist with hard term limits, but it may be worth looking

1:12:06

at the angle in conjunction

1:12:09

with traditional term limits. I'm a big fan of the show.

1:12:11

I've been listening since your 1947

1:12:13

series. Close watchers

1:12:15

of this podcast know the original name,

1:12:18

the first name was 1947.

1:12:20

It was my odd concept

1:12:22

to say, our way of

1:12:24

throwing back. Just call it the year

1:12:26

that Meet the Press had been founded. So anyway,

1:12:29

just a little history of the name there. I

1:12:34

think the mandatory age limit is

1:12:36

a possibility. I think

1:12:39

there's bipartisan momentum for it. I definitely think

1:12:41

you see it. You heard it. Nikki Haley

1:12:43

made it a part of her campaign. She

1:12:48

wanted mandatory mental tests,

1:12:50

if you will, that

1:12:52

she was going for. Whatever

1:12:55

we do here, if

1:12:57

you do age limits, though, it's going to have to be in the

1:12:59

Constitution. The only reason why, and

1:13:02

if we start revisiting, I think we ought to revisit

1:13:04

what the age limits are to

1:13:06

become a member of Congress, to become a US Senator,

1:13:09

and to become President of the United States. We set

1:13:11

those age limits of 25 for the House, minimum

1:13:13

30 for the Senate, minimum 35

1:13:15

for the presidency. Back in the

1:13:18

18th century, when life expectancy was

1:13:20

somewhere around 60, give or

1:13:22

take. I certainly think if you get into

1:13:25

there, you're going to have to

1:13:29

probably remove, at

1:13:31

least go down to 18, maybe we would move

1:13:33

the ... I don't

1:13:35

see why we should have

1:13:37

any age limits once you're a citizen. I

1:13:39

think it's going to be a tough thing,

1:13:42

but if you do it in there, if you're going to open the store, you're

1:13:44

going to have to deal with that, plus there. I

1:13:46

think there is some ... I

1:13:49

think there's certainly some momentum for that, maybe

1:13:51

it's 75. I certainly

1:13:54

think on the judiciary, it's more

1:13:56

likely to happen. I think the

1:13:58

fact, because there isn't voters ... in

1:14:00

the middle that can make this decision. I

1:14:02

do think that as long as voters get

1:14:05

to decide whether to keep somebody or

1:14:08

push them out of office, that

1:14:11

you're always, I think that the term limits argument

1:14:13

is always going to be up for debate because

1:14:15

of that, right? Because if you throw in, if

1:14:17

you knew there's a mandatory retirement age, if you

1:14:19

also know that there's term limits, there's

1:14:22

also less incentive for the out party

1:14:24

to challenge a sitting member after one

1:14:26

term if they know, well, it's going

1:14:28

to be open in the

1:14:30

second term. Do you actually make

1:14:32

things less competitive, right? For

1:14:35

instance, in California where they've had state

1:14:38

legislative term limits forever, they

1:14:40

have these bizarre like, well, they start plotting, I'm

1:14:42

going to be term limited out of my assembly

1:14:44

seat, so I'm now going to start plotting my

1:14:47

state senate race. I'm going to get term limited

1:14:49

out of my state senate race, so I'm going

1:14:51

to start plotting my race for state auditor or

1:14:53

something like that. I

1:14:56

don't know, I don't think

1:14:59

term limits solves what everybody thinks it does.

1:15:03

And I really wish if we really made

1:15:05

buried or entry to running for office easier

1:15:07

to get, have

1:15:09

primaries be less impactful, then maybe we

1:15:11

wouldn't be so concerned with sort of

1:15:14

term limit, figuring out other ways

1:15:17

to keep people from sort of rotting in

1:15:19

office, if you will, because that's what we're

1:15:21

all concerned about, right? That term limits or

1:15:23

aids that you just sort of sit

1:15:26

in office and you lose touch with the voters,

1:15:28

you lose touch with folks, but because of the

1:15:30

way the system works, you're sort of jerry-rigged and

1:15:32

you're automatically in. So I understand, you

1:15:34

know, I guess I would go back

1:15:37

to is like, why are we proposing this? Because

1:15:39

we're sort of frustrated that the system doesn't

1:15:41

make these folks more vulnerable than

1:15:43

they, you know, and so should

1:15:45

we be concentrating our efforts making

1:15:49

primaries more competitive, right? More open to

1:15:51

more voters, you know, getting rid of

1:15:53

party primaries altogether. If

1:15:56

We got rid of party primaries altogether and made

1:15:58

everybody a bit more vulnerable to every... The

1:16:00

election. Perhaps. We wouldn't

1:16:02

feel the need. We wouldn't be so

1:16:04

worried about coming up with alternative ways

1:16:06

to kick people out of office. I

1:16:08

eat term limits for mandatory retirement. It.

1:16:12

To how's that for my roundabout way

1:16:14

of sort of not answering your question?

1:16:16

Their jobs. Ah, But. I

1:16:18

think it's I go back to. In

1:16:21

a what is your primary goal

1:16:23

right of of why do you

1:16:25

want this and a better primary

1:16:27

goal should we be actually looking

1:16:29

at other avenues of reform first

1:16:31

before we sort of settle for

1:16:33

the Terminator. Charlie

1:16:36

thank you for that for sending

1:16:38

in your questions. Remember you to

1:16:40

send, send me your comments and

1:16:42

questions at V. Chuck Todd Cast

1:16:44

as email.com Just like my alma

1:16:46

mater, the George Washington University, it

1:16:48

doesn't have so includes thoughts Saw.

1:16:51

Said the question maybe or minus or

1:16:54

in an upcoming Saturday Bernadette Middle East

1:16:56

Side Catherine missing said except for was

1:16:58

produced by matter their allies Miller and

1:17:00

great part for the Elizabeth deposed by

1:17:02

still needs to be my column and

1:17:04

A B C that com have. You

1:17:09

had half of it as a hot.

1:17:13

And for the things and. I

1:17:25

joined the U.S. Air Force at a young age. It

1:17:27

helped shape me into the leader I am today. But

1:17:30

after eight years, I was ready for

1:17:32

a different kind of authority. No,

1:17:35

Daddy. Mr. Less. Than. Bear

1:17:37

always gets the first sip.

1:17:40

I was ready to see my daughter lead. I

1:17:43

was ready for the Air Force Reserve. Give

1:17:46

your hard-earned benefits the benefit of more

1:17:48

time. Learn more

1:17:50

at airforce.com/reserve.