Episodit
-
We are getting a government shutdown for Christmas! Or Hanukkah!
Hereâs what happened and what might come next.
On Thursday night, a vote on a continuing resolution was taken, which some viewed as 1) a stunning rebuke to Donald Trump 2) raising fears of a shutdown.
The first claim is almost certainly incorrect, and the second is possibly wrong.
Last minute gift idea! Get yourself a subscription.
The root of the conflict lies in the Republican House conferenceâs inability to unite behind ANY Continuing Resolution to fund the government. There are a handful of Reps that simply donât vote for them. Ever. For anyone.
This is not a problem for the Democrats who do not have fiscal hawks in their ranks. Itâs just a part of the game.
But Speaker Mike Johnson needs to pass a CR. So he has no choice but to negotiate with Democrats. But they know that he knows that they know he needed their support. Sensing leverage, Democrats demanded extensive concessions, transforming a slim resolution into a sprawling 1,500-page bill resembling an omnibus. Republican leaders, frustrated by being excluded from these negotiations, learned details of the bill from lobbyists who had inside knowledge.
The situation intensified when media narratives blamed Trump and Elon Musk for killing the bill. In reality, internal GOP dissension doomed the Quasibus CR as soon as the text hit the internet. It would have died when it went to a vote.
Did Trump and Musk accelerate its collapse and prevent a vote? Sure. But it woke up dead. It was never happening.
Trumpâs Truth Social missives did set a new course, advocating for a clean continuing resolution with disaster relief and other GOP priorities while proposing a two-year suspension of the debt ceilingâa strategic move to avoid draining political capital on recurring debt ceiling battles. Specifically the Trump tax cuts which are a top priority in 2025.
House conservatives, especially fiscal hawks like Ralph Norman, Chip Roy, and Thomas Massie oppose eliminating the debt ceiling (a key Republican cudgel when Dems run things) unless there are other massive spending cuts to go along with them. Their resistance in the Rules Committee prevented the bill from advancing traditionally, forcing a long-shot vote requiring a two-thirds majority on Thursday night, which was never realistic.
GOP leadership permitted the vote anyway to gauge opposition and explore potential concessions.
To put simpler, the bill that failed last night was always meant to fail. The question was by how much and who would vote no. One GOP House staffer expressed to me that more rock ribbed conservatives that talk a big game about government spending voted to suspend the debt ceiling than he would have guessed.
Looking ahead, the bill will likely shrink more, possibly making the debt ceiling provision more palatable. If Johnson can flip one of the three hardliners on the Rules Committee, a party-line vote might succeed. Alternatively, a few Democrats might cross over, given the approaching holidays and the general desire to avoid a government shutdown.
However, if the government does shut down, the practical impact could be limited since most federal employees would still receive holiday paychecks. Political fallout, however, would be inevitable, with intensified pressure to strike a deal after the new year.
Despite the chaos, some GOP insiders view the vote as more promising than expected. Though 33 Republicans voted against the resolution, party leaders seem cautiously optimistic. If Trump and key Senate allies like J.D. Vance begin actively whipping votes, a slimmed-down resolution could pass. The next steps remain uncertain, hinging on whether enough conservatives can be persuaded to compromise in the days ahead.
Or we shut down and reload for the new year as Trump 2 begins as Trump 1 ended: messy.
Chapters & Timecodes
* [00:00:00] Introduction and Upcoming Topics
* [00:01:59] U.S. Government Shutdown and Congressional Infighting
* [00:12:02] Trudeauâs Political Crisis in Canada
* [00:49:19] Musa Al-Gharbi on U.S. Electoral Trends
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
I donât think Kamala Harris will ever be president.
I donât think she has a connection with Americans beyond a core Democratic base who can be easily wooâd by another shiny object. I think she would do best in the one-party state she came from and run for governor of California where she might even pass for the centrist she positioned herself as nationally.
But I may well be wrong. If I am Bill Scher will have told me otherwise.
He believes she enters our four-year cycle to select the next president as the most well positioned Vice President loser in recent American history.
Damning with faint praise? Maybe.
We discuss 2028 and everything we got wrong about the election in this chat!
Chapters:
00:00:00 - Introduction and Overview
00:03:06 - Bill Scher on 2024 Election Insights
00:15:01 - Trumpâs Continued Popularity
00:40:02 - Trumpâs Lawsuit Against Iowa Pollsters
00:45:02 - House GOP Budget Standoff
00:46:47 - AOCâs Leadership Challenge in Congress
00:50:09 Handicapping 2028 Contenders
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
Puuttuva jakso?
-
Iâm diving deeper into DeButts.
Yes friends, thereâs been a crack in the DeButts case.
To recap, on December 3rd, Anna Navarro tweeted that Hunter DeButts, the brother-in-law of Woodrow Wilson, was pardoned. This is not true. There is no historical record of a Hunter DeButts connected to Woodrow Wilson, and Wilson certainly did not pardon him. Navarro later admitted this was incorrect, blaming a ChatGPT search result.
However, nobody could recreate the exact hallucination she posted, and the citation icons in her screenshot resembled an outdated ChatGPT interface.
Curious, I discussed this with Andrew Mayne, my co-host on The Attention Mechanism, a podcast about AI. I also asked listeners to try replicating Navarroâs prompt in ChatGPT. Shortly after, I received an email from a listener named Bret, who provided screenshots showing that while he got the same initial answers Navarro referencedâBill Clinton pardoning Roger Clinton and Donald Trump pardoning Charles KushnerâHunter DeButts was nowhere to be found.
Brettâs search led to a site called living.alot.com, which featured a listicle titled âFive Presidents and Governors Who Have Pardoned Family Members.â Interestingly, this article was last edited on the same day Navarro tweeted. My next move was to contact the articleâs supposed author, Ron Winkler. However, the author photo appeared unmistakably AI-generated, suggesting the entire article was likely created by a generative AI model.
Investigating further, I found that living.alot.com is owned by Inuvo.com, an ad-tech company specializing in AI-driven marketing solutions. This suggested that the hallucination might not have come from ChatGPT itself but from living.alot.com, an AI-generated listicle site, possibly due to SEO optimization targeting AI-driven search engines. If ChatGPT search pulled from this listicle, it would explain the strange result Navarro saw.
Speculating further, it seems plausible that Inuvo.com, focused on generating ad revenue, might have tweaked its content after seeing traffic driven by the controversy to avoid being de-ranked or blacklisted by search algorithms. Bretâs recreation of almost the exact same search result strengthens this theory.
If anyone at OpenAI working on ChatGPT Search is reading, I recommend a hard look at de-ranking or blacklisting the alot.com suite of sites. The credibility of search-powered AI depends on filtering out such low-quality content.
In the end, the mystery of Hunter DeButts appears to be a hallucination generated by an ad-tech company leveraging AI-driven SEO tactics.
Navarroâs strange ChatGPT result wasnât directly ChatGPTâs faultâit was fed a falsehood generated by a content-churning AI.
And with that, the Hunter DeButts saga is solved.
Allâs well that ends well.
Chapters & Time Codes
* (00:00:00) Introduction: Media, Politics & New Ventures
* (00:01:20) Unmasking the Hunter DeButts Hoax
* (00:15:01) Political Shifts: Murkowski and Ocasio-Cortez
* (00:17:27) Government Shutdown Negotiations
* (00:20:26) Chris Cillizza
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
This episode includes a serious, hour-long discussion with Ryan McBeth on Syria, Iran, Lebanon, Israel and everything in between.
AND
We dive deep into this tweetâŠ
Of course, on December 24, 1917, President Woodrow Wilson issued the controversial pardon for his brother-in-law, Hunter DeButts, convicted of arms smuggling during World War I.
DeButts, married to Wilsonâs sister-in-law, Alice, was sentenced to 15 years after British intelligence exposed his fraudulent shipping scheme. Though furious, Wilson faced mounting political pressure amid war preparations. The White House cited new evidence suggesting DeButts was manipulated by foreign spies, and critics accused Wilson of nepotism, while supporters framed the pardon as holiday clemency. After his release, DeButts vanished from public life, reportedly living quietly in Cuba until his death in 1933.
Except. Wait a minute. What you just read, isnât true.
I fabricated it by directing ChatGPT using Model 4o with the Mac app to make up a fictional reason why Hunter DeButts received a pardon from Woodrow Wilson.
Because Hunter DeButts never received a pardon from Woodrow Wilson.
Hunter DeButts did not marry Wilsonâs sister.
Nor did he receive a pardon.
There are other Hunter DeButts involved with Wilson or that time in history.
And yet, Anna Navarro tweeted about it. Upon a simple Google search Navarro wound up getting serially dunked on as people realized very quickly something wasnât accurate.
And so Anna Navarro posted the following explanation:
She blamed ChatGPTâs hallucinations.
Oh, well. Weâve all been there.
But have we?
While conservatives dunked on Navarro even further for believing ChatGPT, I am here to tell you, as a reporter through and through, I donât know if ChatGPT hallucinated this. And really, I am following the research of my friend, Andrew Mayne, who first sent this to me and said, he could not replicate the Hunter DeButts answer on any ChatGPT model. Not 4o, not any model that is available, and specifically was available to Navarro on December 2nd.
Now, hereâs something that you guys might not know about large language models: they are fairly replicable. You can get similar answers based on similar questions. Itâs not exact, but a hallucination is something that you should be able to recreate. It would be odd if you couldnât.
And my friend Andrew should know. He worked at OpenAI. He was a science communicator. He made a lot of videos that demonstrated OpenAI products up to and including ChatGPT itself and is known as the first prompt engineer for that company. He spent a lot of time with these models.
And with that, I went down my own reporting rabbit hole. Because one of the other things is that the screen grab that Anna Navarro showed was a ChatGPT search that had web results.
See those little brackets with quotes in between them. Those would be annotations. Theoretically, you could click on them and they would bring you to a webpage that would show you where ChatGPT got this information.
Whatâs odd about it is that those are not the annotations that ChatGPT uses now. And they certainly were not used on December 2nd when Anna Navarro said that she did this search.
So whereâd she get it? What version of ChatGPT is she using? And what large language model is going to be the origin story of dear sweet DeButts?
I had a theory.
Letâs say youâre not particularly tech-savvy, if you donât know exactly what ChatGPT is or OpenAI is, then it is very easy, as ChatGPT has become more and more popular, to just go into the iOS app store and find a lot of â Iâm going to call them copycats.
What they really are are other apps that are using the ChatGPT API, but they do a skin on top of it and they often charge you a subscription service.
Do not use them.
But I did because my theory was that Ana Navarro was using one of these apps, one of these apps that are not using similar if not exact user interface the official ChatGPT app is. Maybe they are using those old annotations?
All is revealed!
We get to the bottom of DeButts, on this episode of the Politics Politics Politics.
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
If I could change one thing about the Democratic Party it would be this:
Stop demanding blind loyalty to the One True Message.
Yes, coalition building is hard.
Yes, your most passionate members will be the loudest.
Yes, things could go wrong.
But the alternative is what youâve had and that is what you are about to hear from the Harris-Walz campaign leadership in this episode. We invented a totally implausible and frankly laughable narrative and then were frustrated when progressives, the media and voters didnât buy it.
They are to blame! Not the candidate. Not the message. Certainly not the brilliant team that put this in motion.
It would have been easy if everyone just blindly repeated that Kamala Harris is a bi-partisan deal maker who understands the best ideas come from beyond the beltway. Sure, itâs plain to see that sheâs a Democratic stalwart from the most iconic liberal state in the union. But if you keep repeating the first one, the dumbs will believe it!
We discuss the Democratic obsession with messaging with ettingermentum.
Also, Alice Miranda Ollstein of Politico on the future of the Pro Choice movement.
Itâs a warm, expansive Px3 for a winter weekend.
Chapters
2:26 Pod Save America Breakdown
1:00:00 Update: Musk, Hegseth
1:09:17 Future of Pro Choice Movement w/ Alice Ollstein
1:31:28 Ettingermentum
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
Hunter Biden brought all of this on himself.
Joe Biden has damaged his legacy.All of this can and should get worse for both of them.
Two Things I Donât Want to Hear in Response to This Argument:
* TrumpDonald Trump is his own conversation. Not everything related to any Democratic politician needs to be held in contrast to him. Itâs lazy at best and corrosive at worst.
* AddictionI donât often play this card, but I am the son of an alcoholic and was raised by a problem gambler. Both went to 12-step programs for their issues. Addiction is a multi-faceted problem that deserves sophisticated empathy, but it is NOT an enchantment shielding you from the consequences of your actions. Quite the opposite: the 12-step program is designed to rebuild your sense of responsibility by repairing the damage you caused while afflicted.
The pardon not only reveals the 46th president as a craven cardboard cutout of a decent man, but it also expands the bounds of presidential pardons in a uniquely selfish direction under the sickening guise of loyalty to family.
But no one should be surprised if youâve followed this story from the beginning. It is one unforced error after the next. One hapless mistake after another defended by unhinged self-indulgence.
Letâs walk the timeline that led us to the most recent crimes:
* Hunter Bidenâs LaptopHunter leaves a laptop at a computer repair shop and forgets it. The shop owner realizes who owns it and turns it over to the FBI. After nothing is done and Joe Bidenâs campaign makes statements the shop owner knows to be false, the laptop is leaked to the press.
* Joe Bidenâs ResponseHis campaign denies fault, deflects blame, and hides behind Hunterâs addiction.
* 51 intelligence experts sign a letter calling it Russian disinformation.
* Biden repeats this during a debate.
* Twitter and Facebook are pressured to suppress links to coverage.
The laptop is later proven real.
* Tax InvestigationIn 2020, Hunter announces he is being investigated for tax fraud (ongoing since 2018).In 2023, a plea deal is reached. Hunter agrees to plead guilty to two misdemeanor tax charges and enters a pretrial diversion program for a felony firearm offense (illegal possession of a gun while using drugs). The deal is expected to avoid jail time.
* IRS WhistleblowersTwo IRS whistleblowers testify before Congress, alleging misconduct and interference in the Hunter Biden investigation. They claim their efforts to pursue charges were stymied by higher-ups in the Justice Department.
* The Plea Deal CollapsesDuring a court hearing, U.S. District Judge Maryellen Noreika raises concerns about the plea deal's scope, particularly its immunity from future charges. Hunter pleads not guilty.
* Specifically, the deal reportedly included an agreement not to prosecute Hunter for any federal crimes going forward:"The United States agrees not to criminally prosecute Biden, outside of the terms of this Agreement, for any federal crimes encompassed."
* Hunterâs MemoirThe gun charge stems from Hunterâs own admissions in his memoir, Beautiful Things, where he describes active crack cocaine addiction during the period he purchased the firearm.
* Quote: âI used my superpowerâfinding crack anytime, anywhere.â
* Despite knowing his addiction, he lied on ATF Form 4473 when purchasing the gun.
Hunter sabotaged his own sweetheart plea deal by overreaching for immunity. He was the star witness for his own prosecution because he had to write a book about his new found sobriety.
But if Joe just commuted Hunterâs sentencing for these crimes, it wouldnât be as big of a deal. Sure heâd be a hypocrite but whatâs the real world damage? Hunter didnât spend a month in prison? He avoided probation?
But thatâs not what Joe did.
He did something far greater and no one should forget it.
Joe Biden granted his son a blanket pardon for any and all crimes committed from 2014 to 2024âan unprecedented eleven years.
This goes beyond Hunterâs tax crimes and gun charge, extending into the period when Hunter joined the board of Burismaâthe focal point of influence-peddling allegations against the Biden family.
For context:
* Fordâs pardon of Nixon aimed to move the country past Watergate.
* Bidenâs pardon serves his own family and raises fresh suspicions about influence peddling.
The White Houseâs defense: the incoming Justice Department might weaponize its authority to target the Biden family on exaggerated charges.
I would say for the forever power hunger Joe, that same logic fueled Trumpâs resurgence from a pariah to a potential two-term president. Maybe they should have let it happen.
Instead, this pardon undermines Bidenâs credibility, damages the perception of the presidency, and sets a dangerous precedent for self-serving executive overreach.
So letâs get to the âBut TrumpâŠâ of it all. Trump issued two pardons that are similar to this one.
* Kodak BlackTrump pardoned the rapper after serving a year of a 46-month sentence for lying on a federal gun form.
* Charles KushnerConvicted and served time for a 2005 charge. Pardoned to clear his record.
Both of them spent time in prison for their offenses. Either got blanket pardons that extended beyond what Dick Nixon received.
TheTrump pardons may be gross but donât set new precedent. They donât personally benefit the president.
Bidenâs pardon of Hunter does.
Hunter never paid a price.
Joe Bidenâs legacy should.
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
Happy Thanksgiving!
For your travel Px3 is happy to present to you the only political conversation you will want to hear. Our old friends Tom LoBiano and Michael Cohen breaking down what we have learned in the weeks since the election.
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
BREAKING:
Former Congressman Matt Gaetz has withdrawn his nomination for U.S. Attorney General, citing concerns that his confirmation process was becoming a distraction for the Trump-Vance transition team. Gaetz, a staunch ally of former President Donald Trump, had faced intense scrutiny since his nomination due to allegations of sexual misconduct.
The allegations, which include claims that Gaetz paid women for sex and had inappropriate encounters with a minor, have been the subject of investigations by the Department of Justice and the House Ethics Committee. Reports suggest the House Ethics Committee may release a detailed report on these allegations, though its jurisdiction ended when Gaetz resigned from Congress shortly after his nomination.
Gaetzâs decision to step aside marks the end of a short-lived bid for the top legal post in the Trump administration. The move comes amid ongoing investigations and growing political pressure. It remains unclear what impact this development will have on Gaetzâs future in public life, as he continues to face scrutiny over the allegations.
The Trump-Vance team has yet to announce a replacement for the role.
We discuss this and other Florida political stories with Kimberly Leonard of Politico.
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
Your Guide to the Matt Gaetz Scandal
State of Play:
Ethics report is unreleased as of now, a hacker has apparently obtained parts of the Department of Justice investigation that did not end in prosecution of Gaetz
The iron law of political scandals, as written on the wall of a DC backroom (wash your hands after inspecting): if the public already knows about your dirty deeds and hasnât totally written you off, keep chugging. But every new bit of information that comes out is an exponential risk.
The Gaetz story has been publicly aired for years. So it is really only a liability if new information comes to light.
So what is already known? That way we know if something new comes along.
Well, it comes down to two main questions.
* Are Sugar Babies w****s?
* Is it illegal to sleep with a minor who misrepresents their age? Can the sex be proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
Letâs start with question number one.
Are Sugar Babies w****s?
Which for the pure of heart will begin with a subquestion, what is a Sugar Baby?
A sugar baby is typically a younger individual who enters into a relationship with an older, affluent partnerâknown as a sugar daddy or sugar mommyâin exchange for financial support, gifts, or other benefits. These relationships are often characterized by mutual agreements where the sugar baby provides companionship, and in some cases, intimacy, while receiving monetary assistance, luxury items, or experiences in return.
These connections, like much of our modern world, is facilitated by the internet. For exampleâŠ
Seeking.com is an online dating platform that connects successful and attractive individuals seeking mutually beneficial relationships.
And so it was on Seeking.com that Joel Greenberg, a then-friend of Gaetz who eventually pled guilty to sex trafficking and informed on the congressman, met women to form such relationships. Here is an ABC report of a back and forth between one of the womenâŠ
"I have a friend flying in and we are trying to make plans for tonight. What are your plans for later," Greenberg wrote to the woman, whose identity ABC News is withholding for privacy purposes. "And how much of an allowance will you be requiring :)" Greenberg added.
The woman responded by telling Greenberg she has "a friend who introduced me to the website that I could bring" and said she "usually" requires "$400 per meet."
Greenberg then sent the woman a photo of Gaetz taking a selfie with students at Pea Ridge Elementary from a 2017 visit, and wrote, "My friend," indicating that Gaetz would be the friend joining him.
"Oooh my friend thinks he's really cute!" the woman responded.
Greenberg then replied that Gaetz was "down here only for the day," adding "we work hard and play hard," before asking, "Have you ever tried molly," referring to the drug MDMA, or Ecstasy.
As Greenberg was discussing payment for the get-together, the woman asked if Gaetz used the same website Greenberg had used to meet her. Greenberg replied, in part, "He knows the deal :)," referring to the Florida congressman. The former tax collector then said he would book a "suite Downtown" for the gathering.
Sugar Baby websites are built on the idea that wealthy people connect with attractive people. The implication of money or expensive gifts being exchanged is inherent to the concept. But⊠are the women legally w****s? Specifically, women who are charging money for the act of sex?
This is a very important question. Flying a friend you eventually have sex with across state lines on your dime is a nice thing to do. Flying a w***e across state lines to pay for intercourse is sex trafficking.
We do not have an answer for this. Although Greenberg plead guilty to sex trafficking so he seemingly admitted it.
In general it is a moral and legal question that I am sure many rich men, including possibly some in congress, likely donât want answered.
However, it gets even more serious when one of those women is 17 years old. Which leads us to our second question.
Is it illegal to sleep with a minor who misrepresents their age? Can the sex be proven beyond a reasonable doubt?
A lawyer for two women interviewed by the House Ethics Committee has said the following:
Leppard told POLITICO on Sunday that his clients had attended between five to 10 "sex parties" with the former Florida Representative between 2017 and 2018. Gaetz was already in Congress at the time.
Leppard also said one of his clients witnessed Gaetz having sex with another woman who was then 17 years old. They were at a house party in Florida.
"She testified [that] in July of 2017, at this house party, she was walking out to the pool area, and she looked to her right, and she saw Rep. Gaetz having sex with her friend, who was 17," Leppard said.
A report from The Daily Beast identified two Venmo transactions Gaetz had in 2018 with Joe Greenberg, an accused sex trafficker, for a total of $900. Greenberg then sent the money to three teen girls in transactions labeled "tuition" and "school."
The woman, now in her 20s, reportedly confirmed this during interviews with the House Ethics committee.
In Florida, engaging in sexual activity with a minor is illegal, regardless of whether the minor misrepresents their age. The state enforces strict liability in such cases, meaning that a defendant's belief about the minor's age, even if based on the minor's false representation, is not a valid defense. Florida Statute 794.021 explicitly states that ignorance or a reasonable mistake regarding the victim's age is not a defense to prosecution under sexual offense laws.
And yet⊠the woman in question also testified about this to criminal investigators and no charges were filed against Gaetz. This might suggest that the case against him is less than air tight. Or that proof beyond personal testimony would not stand up at trial.
So no⊠you cannot claim ignorance on having sex with a 17-year-old in Florida. But also, there might not be evidence to prove it happened beyond a he said/she said.
Again: this has all been known for years after Greenbergâs arrest and the Department of Justice investigation.
Will there be new information? We have to wait and see.
But it also might not matter, because Gaetzâ higher hurdle to clear has nothing to do with what he did or didnât do as a military-grade horny Florida Man bachelor⊠but rather his conduct as a rhetorical bomb thrower who has personally torched members of the Senate whose vote he now needs to court.
-
That and more on the show!
CHAPTERS
00:43 Guide to Matt Gaetz Sex Scandal
17:24 Normally Podcast (Karol Markowicz and MK Ham)
49:08 Update: Selzer, Lutnick, Trump's NY Sentencing
58:02 Gabe Fleisher
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
Things polling get right in 2024:
* Trump had a chance to win the popular vote (he did)
* Trump had an advantage in the Sun Belt but the races in the Rust Belt would be closer (true, Trump still won them all)
* Ticket splitting is real and could save Democrats from a Senate demolition (it did)
But beyond that⊠we have some real questions.
Carl Allen believed Kamala Harris was a favorite to win the electoral college. Together we go through the results and find lessons big and small.
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
I am obsessed with how much money the Kamala Harris campaign spent.
Hundreds of millions of dollars per week spent on creating a once-in-a-lifetime glittering election machine only to deliver less electoral votes than John Kerry.
Some FEC reports are available but reporting on the excesses is also bubbling up. For example, Harris recreated the set of Call Her Daddy in a DC hotel room so she didnât have to fly to Los Angeles.
Videos of a party thrown by the KamalaHQ social media team for Fashion Week have also surfaced.
I believe the Harris â24 might be a turning point for donor patience, so we will have much more on it going forward. But to whet your whistle⊠we have Dave Levinthal to chat about it today.
Combine that with Kirk Bado of National Journalâs Hotline to discuss the future of the Democratic Party and you have todayâs episode!
Also, Trumpâs cabinet appointments continue.
Chapters
00:00 Introduction
02:39 Kirk Bado
40:32 Update On Trump Appointments
55:00 Dave Levinthal
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
Much like the Trump Tax Cuts, the $99 Annual Deal for all bonus content is now permanent. Enjoy!
As we sift through the multi-billion dollar wreckage of this election Iâve recruited Evan Scrimshaw to figure out what we know about this election.
First, if you had a Time Machine and your only goal was to increase the vote share of the Biden or Harris campaign, what time would you go back to and what would you say?
Then we carve through the revelations weâve had since Tuesday including understanding Trumpâs popularity and the electoral benefit of putting Jews on the ticket.
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
Immediate thoughts on the Trump win.
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
ânuff said.
Find your polling place.
Enjoy this entirely non-political conversation with Scott Johnson. Literally, no politics are discussed at all. But there is a lot about religion, fast food, parenthood, weed and more.
See you on the other side.
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
You asked! We listened! The $99 Annual Deal is extended until Election Day. Make sure you upgrade from your complimentary status if you are coming from Patreon!
Here it is⊠Our conversation with Kevin Ryan on the state of the culture and philosophy that this election takes place in.
With that, my final thoughts.
Did you ever hear the tragedy of Darth Plagueis The Wise? I thought not. Itâs not a story the Jedi would tell you.
Thatâs a quote from a Star Wars prequel and itâs the final decider on who I believe will win the President, the Senate and the House.
We will get back to that.
First, letâs empty the file on my 2024 election thoughts in order.
First, the landscapeâŠ
Donald Trump is a flawed candidate damaged by January 6th and hard capped at 48%
Itâs the reason his party tried to overthrow him during the primaries. However, his resilience and ease in overcoming those challenges is telling.
Donald Trump began to gain and beat Joe Biden in head to head polling after he was indicted and his New York trial had a positive effect on his polling
This was the first moment I believed Trump could have a redemptive arc. If the public did not understand the charges against him and saw the prosecutions as political, he would be a martyr beyond core MAGA.
The Dobbs decision has been rocket fuel for Democrats
In off-year elections and special elections the present threat to reproductive rights have gotten Democratic voters to the polls. My criticism that they might be punished for not taking the threat seriously enough has not panned out as of yet.
Joe Bidenâs presidency has been broadly unpopular and specifically unpopular with anyone who makes under $100,000 a year
Biden was elected in the panic of COVID to be a steady hand at the wheel. He lost that with Afghanistan and never regained it. The border went from a purely GOP partisan issue to a mainstream winner for Republicans almost entirely because of executive orders Biden made at the beginning of his presidency.
Issue after issue, the same playbook unfolded⊠deny, deny, deny until you blame it on Trump.
But nothing was more personal than inflation. A class warfare issue like no other.
Personal story, my wife and I were driving to dinner with friends. The husband was at the wheel of their new Tesla. The issue of politics comes up. I mentioned Trump was doing well because of the economy. âBut the economy is good?â Is the response. And it is a sentiment Iâve heard from many people in my orbit and online. The stock market is booming? We avoided a recession? Inflation is lower here than anywhere else the world? How is this a weakness?
And behind the wheel of a new Tesla, I agree.
Which is where we get to that $100,000 a year figure. Because anywhere below that, inflation gets infinitely worse. Itâs persistent and embarrassing. A ritual humiliation and reminder you are not good enough. That kind of stuff sticks with people.
So thatâs the landscape⊠how about the candidates
TRUMP
To say that Donald Trump has run his best campaign out of his three tries is an understatement.
Iâll be honest, I stopped trying to fully understand the logic of Trump sometime in 2016. His combativeness, the issues he centered and erratic behavior is impossible to grade. Why did he just send that tweet? Has he discovered a hidden undercurrent in American society? Or did the KFC bucket he had last night make him farty?
In his two previous attempts he often didnât seem to understand which way was up either. He fired two different campaign directors in 2016. He fired one of them in 2020.
Both times, election day came with him trailing mightily in the polls. The refrain for his chances became religious. He will pull through⊠becauseâŠ
But thatâs not the case this cycle. Susie Wiles, a Florida GOP veteran who watched her party take a purple state and drench it blood red and Chris LaCivita a bare-knuckle student of the last era of a Republican dominance under George W. Bush have run the ship from initial announcement to election day.
Tactically, the boat has pointed in the right direction.
Trump decapitated well-funded rivals in his own party in Desantis and Haley. He ended the political career of the man who beat him in 2020.
Trump has stayed off Twitter and has largely been able to avoid his habit of turning a bad 24 hours into a bad 3 days because of his inability to concede a point. He has mitigated his worst issue, abortion, as well as anyone who appointed the justices that flipped Roe vs. Wade can and accentuated his strengths with the economy and the border.
Of course, he is still Trump. Heâs an a*****e that viserally annoys 40% of the country.
He is the loser pissbaby who couldnât wrap his head around losing in 2020 and did a January 6th. And with that I will now leave space on the page so you can add the pet issue or event that you believe best encapsulates why Donald J. Trump should never be president again.
If you need more space, please open a new window and hit return until you have enough.
He also got shot in the face and survived. Not really sure how that factors into an election.
Which brings us toâŠ
KAMALA
Well⊠Letâs start withâŠ
BIDEN
Joe Biden is unpopular. This is in part because two of his failures played into both sides of the coin that helped him beat Trump.
His strength, foreign policy, where he sat on the powerful Senate committee for years was telegenically shattered with the Afghanistan pullout. It is impossible to say you did a good job when people are falling off the landing gear.
His weakness, the border, which he gleefully signed executive orders for on day one of his presidency created another telegenic disaster and supercharged an abusive of Americaâs asylum system. Itâs impossible to say you did a good job when hundreds of Haitians, Chinese and Congolese have found themselves in Texas border towns.
Add inflation, add Gaza.
But it was his age that ended his career. The one thing he couldnât ultimately shift the blame for.
The depression about his horrific debate created a panic for him to drop out, an unthinkable move as late in the campaign.
Which brings me to Darth Plagueis the WiseâŠ
It was at the RNC when I sat in stadium seating talking with a man I would later be told knows everyone in Washington. We were watching something in a stadium in recessed seating which is what reminds me of the Darth Plagueis scene.
I am steadfast and pig headed that Biden wonât drop out. Heâs too stubborn, I said stubbornly. Very calmly⊠he explains to me that Joe Biden will drop out this Sunday. He would have done it during the RNC but he didnât want to give the most important speech of his career while he had COVID.
Within and hour Mark Halperin reported something similar.
Sunday morning, I wrote a newsletter about how Biden would never say die. Sunday afternoon, Biden announced he would not seek the presidency.
I looked like quite the a*****e.
It was Joe-ver.
My assumption was that taking over a campaign mid-stream was like trying to fix an F1 car while driving it and trying to win a race. Impossible.
And yetâŠ
KAMALA
The Democrats hot swapped Biden for Kamala and for a shining glimmer of a moment⊠it looked like something was brewing.
Brat Summer. Coconut Trees. Unburdned by what has been.
Sure there were some weird moments⊠why do so many big named Dems not want to be VP? But the vibes! THE JOY!
When Kamala selected Tim Walz over Josh Shapiro, the leftist base of the party rejoiced! She picked a man who is at his best explaining liberal solutions to normies! Not the polished Obama clone just because he is the very popular governor of a swing state. This was bold! This was new! This was interesting!
And then⊠she tacked rightâŠ
Wait. Why pick the guy that can explain single payer health care with a Cabelas metaphor if you are going to talk about how Israel has a right to a lethal defense force that can eradicate any enemy it identifies? Why not pick the Jew who is +20 in Pennsylvania?
At least she found a wedge issue to distance herself from Biden⊠wait⊠didnât do that either.
Did she parlay the buzz of the summer into a series of interviews with friendly media to reintroduce herself? Nope. Didnât do that either.
I took a lot of crap from folks when I said she lost the debate. Not because she didnât rhetorically hold her own, but because she had the most to gain by telling America about herself and she mostly spent her time running down Trump.
Cathartic after Bidenâs disaster? Sure. But not the mission.
And she hasnât really done much since then.
To her credit, her campaign has not been a flaming disaster like her 2019 run was.
But⊠one thing seems to be the same as that failure⊠the more America sees of Kamala Harris, the less they like her.
Which brings us toâŠ
THE RACE
Do any of my opinions about the Harris campaign matter?
Donald Trump is a one-man Get Out The Vote drive for the Democrats. The specter of him returning to power raised OVER A BILLION dollars since Kamala took over.
And so we get to the final decision and it is determined by what you believeâŠ
Do you believe polls that say Donald Trump is more popular than he has ever been?
Do you believe polls that say Democrats are at Obama-level excitement for Kamala?
Do you believe (as our friend Ettingermentum has spelled out) that polls are herding to a stalemate because they are terrified to overestimate Democratic support again and are therefore overestimating Trump support?
Do you believe that an administration with a 30/60 right track/wrong track environment can win re-election?
Thatâs a lot to think about⊠much like the Tragedy of Darth Plagueis the WiseâŠ
Because in that RNC conversation with the Guy Who Knows Everyone⊠where he told me the exact day Biden would drop out and I didnât believe him... He told me something else. He told me Kamala would be the candidate.
And he went furtherâŠ
He told me that Democratic power brokers know she canât win. But they know sheâs a bad candidate and donât want her around in 2028 when the party can really rebuild. So this a suicide mission. Raise a lot of money. Give her the old college try. Pat her on the head when itâs over and never have to be in the Kamala Harris business again.
So, do I believe him now?
I believe that Donald Trump is inarguably the defining figure for a decade of politics, love him or hate him.
I believe he has run a better campaign than both of his opponents.
I believe enough independent voters did not have a good time the last four years.
I believe Donald Trump, the 45th president will become the 47th president.
Donald Trump will be the 4,547th president.
I believe the map is too favorable to Republicans to not hand them the Senate.
But I donât believe that a shoddy Get Out The Vote operation and reliance on low propensity voters in blue states is enough to win them the house.
Republican White House, Republican Senate. Democratic House.
Of our four scenariosâŠ
PAX MAGA - Republican Sweep
Democratic Civil War - GOP White House and Senate, Democratic House
Unburdened By What Has Been - Democratic White House and House, GOP Senate
Roe Sends Her Regards - Democratic Sweep
I believe Democratic Civil War⊠is the most likely.
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
You asked! We listened! The $99 Annual Deal is extended until Election Day. Make sure you upgrade from your complimentary status if you are coming from Patreon!
We are in the endgame now. Iâve asked experts from across the spectrum who they believe will win the White House, Senate and House. Now itâs my turn.
But I have a few last trusted advisors to speak to first.
Michael Cohen (Model Political Campaigns) and Tom LoBianco of 24Sight.news help break down the closing polls and model out how the election will finally shake out.
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
If you would like to get 150 episodes of Politics Politics Politics for $99 please take advantage of our annual deal that ends on Halloween!
By the time you hear this episode, we will have less than seven days until Election Day.
Here are the metrics I am looking atâŠ
Nate Silverâs Silver Bulletin: Trump 54% to win
Jon Ralstonâs Nevada Early Voting Blog: GOP has 38,000 ballot advantage
VoteHub Early Voting Counter
And here is the math comparing the final tallies in Nevada and ArizonaâŠ
Electoral History of Nevada:
Biden +2.5
Clinton +2.5
Obama +6.5
Obama +12.5
Electoral History of Arizona:
Biden + Less than .5
Trump + 3.5
Romney +9
McCain +8.5
How much more Democratic is Nevada than Arizona?
2008: 21
2012: 15.5
2016: 6
2020: 2
On this episode of the show we welcome Taylor Lorenz for the first time. We discuss independent media, the blogging revolution of the 2000s and an unfortunate tweet. Also, Wake Up To Politicsâ Gabe Fleisher helps us look at the final hours of this contest. And finally, Mark Sutton helps us break down the gender gap.
Letâs go!
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
Donât take early numbers too seriously. Itâs the first chapter of a book. You might think you know where it goes, but each story is different. Early votes are not linear, they are often jumbled by different start times or counting processes.
So donât take them seriously.
Okay? Did you read that? Are you not going to take them seriously?
Fine. Letâs torture ourselves with early voting data.
* VoteHub
* Jon Ralston Early Voting Blog
* UMichVoter
AlsoâŠ
The great Bill Scher (Washington Monthly) joins to discuss where Kamala Harris is and how she wins the election. Andrew Heaton tells us of all the political signage heâs seen during his road trip from Texas to Washington DC.
Chapters
2:56 Early Vote
13:21 Bill Scher
1:00:13 UPDATE (Obama and Kamala, $28 million Polymarket Bet, Trump Legal Strategy)
1:09:50 Andrew Heaton
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
If you are looking for good President Harris omens, you might want to check back later.
* Every betting market has now firmly tilted Trump
* Polling averages continue to show Harris wilting in the Blue Wall states
* Silver Bulletin, 538 and The Economist prediction models now all point to Trump
* The Oracle of Nevada Jon Ralston brings positively bleak news about the early vote in the Silver State for Democrats
Take all of those for what you will. But remember this, the only reason why President Biden isnât on this ticket is because down ballot candidates made noise that he was dragging them down.
Well take a look at an ad Bob Casey is running. The Pennsylvania Senator and staunch Biden ally who is in a close race with Republican Dave McCormick is running an ad bragging about bucking the current White House and working with Donald Trump.
Crunch all the numbers you want, nerds.
I will always pay attention when a politician starts running for their own lives in defiance of the party.
On this episode
* Kirk Bado (National Journalâs Hotline) discusses the Kamala Harris fixation on Liz Cheney and if they are even looking for Never Trumpers in the right places.
* Howard Mortman (C-SPAN) dives deep into late campaign trivia and the traditions of the Al Smith dinner.
* Trump will tape Joe Rogan this Friday.
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe -
PATCH NOTES:
* FIXED audio on Jason Whitely Interview
* REMOVED f-bomb
Apologies for the last exportâŠ
â
A listener sent me a curious story: There is a Super PAC running ads online that paint Kamala Harris as a staunch defender of Israel AND a weak capitulator inflaming anti-semitism by pandering to Palestinians.
Donât believe me? Here are the ads.
Why is the Future Coalition PAC countering their own message? They arenât. Theyâre attempting to inflame both sides of the conflict against Kamala Harris in two swing states.
The Pro-Israel ads are not running in ZIP codes with high Jewish populations, theyâre running in Dearborn, Michigan the highest concentration of Arab Americans in the United States. Meanwhile, the Palestinian âPanderingâ ads are running in the suburbs of Pennsylvania where the majority of that crucial stateâs jewish population lives.
The goal of both is to turn those natural Democratic voters against the nominee.
Thatâs only first 10 minutes of our two-hour episode!
* We are joined by Jason Whitely the senior political reporter for WFAA in Dallas. This week he moderated the debate between Colin Allred and Ted Cruz. We talk to him about his moderating philosophy and his thoughts on Texas politics.
* Evan Scrimshaw
and
Ryan Jakubowski
join the show to do a Narrative Draft. What are the topics we believe will dominate the conversation after the election.
* Carl Allen
explains to us why weâve been reading polls the wrong way our entire lives and how to change it.
All that and snap reactions to the death of Sinwar in Gaza.
This is a public episode. If youâd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politicspoliticspolitics.com/subscribe - Näytä enemmän
