Hi, I'm Molly John Fast and this is Fast Politics. Well, we discussed the top political headlines with some of today's best minds.
We're on vacation, but that doesn't mean we don't have a great show for you Today. Bolts Magazines Daniel Nacatia details how states are going to affect policy in twenty twenty five. But first we'll talk to mother Jones Eda Merlin about how rfk's conspiracy minded world is making new conspiracy theories about a pandemic.
Welcome back to past polity, Axanna, thanks for having me. What's happening right now is so completely insane, So I want you to first talk to us about this paranoia about a post inauguration plandemic.
Yeah.
So, essentially what happened with this is that a scientist and vaccine expert named doctor Peter Hotez went on MSNBC and said that there are these kind of obvious disease outbreak threats the next Trump administration is going to.
Have to deal with.
Right specifically, he said, we have some big picture stuff coming down the pipe, meaning you know, ab and flu news, streams of COVID, other potential outbreaks and sort of conspiracy theorists mostly on the rate took that to me and that he was threatening to unleash disease outbreaks during the next Trump administration, because he also said all that stuff is going to come crashing down on January twenty first on the Trump administration. We need a really good team
to be able to handle this. So that was taken as not just he's warning about disease outbreaks. That was taken as he says they're going to He's going to cause them, which is ridiculous.
Right, It is so completely beyond crazy this idea. So what is the thinking here and who are the people who are narrating this?
Right?
So, I think the first important thing to kind of know here is that doctor Hotez is a really frequent sort of target of the anti vaccine movement and the right and the far right, you know, just to kind of set the scene, he's, like I believe he's he wears a bow tie. He's a recognized vaccine expert and has been for years and was a real proponent during
COVID four people to get vaccinated. And then all of that has put him on the radar of people like Steve Bannon and Carlson and Joe Rogan and Aaron Rodgers, all of them have denounced him in pretty like personal terms over the years. So almost anytime he says anything, he faces some degree of sort of outrage, harassment, pushback,
what have you. But talking specifically about these new threats that the next Trump administration is going to face also ran into this other thing, which is that the broader kind of conspiracy community has been warning that, you know, the deep spit, deep state or other dark forces are going to try to interfere with Trump's presidency, you know, and somehow set him up for failure, which it's worth noting they also said this last time before he took office,
Like Alex Jones said before Trump took office the first time, you know, they're not going to let him take office, And so there's a lot of that now. This just sort of created a kind of perfect storm situation where the folks are trying to tell their audiences that Trump is already under threat, right and running up against something that is real and true, which is there are probably going to be some pretty serious disease outbreaks in the
next couple of years. In California, today declared a state of emergency over the Avian flu outbreak, we're seeing new cases in human beings, which is pretty scary.
You know.
We've seen a couple of disease outbreaks in Africa, specifically in Congo. There's a really devastating measles outbreak and also an outbreak of novel disease that they're not sure what it is yet, right, and then COVID is always a threat. We're seeing COVID cases starting to tick back up. So by warning that there's going to be a quote unquote plandemic, like by implying that doctor Hotez or some other people are going to cause the next pandemic, it acknowledges that
it's going to happen, and then it's real. But it puts the blame onto a more politically useful group of actors.
Yeah, because it's much better if they can get mad at the left than the right, is what you're saying.
Well, and if it's a conspiracy, right, if it's not just like the outbreak of infectious disease has been happening for years, it's better if it has a person behind it to blame, preferably somebody who can be depicted as sort of like an opponent of Donald Trump. So you know,
I'm seeing like Mickey willis sharing these ideas. Who's the filmmaker who produced pandemic right of course, you know, which implied that COVID nineteen was sort of deliberately created and unleashed several pretty well known kind of anti vac seating figures conspiratorial news sites like info wars and natural News. So this one got a pretty wide amount of pickup because it was useful for so many different people.
Yeah, I would love you to talk about it.
How a lot of these conspiracies are actually used by people on the right to push a narrative.
Can you talk a little more about them.
The common thread with a lot of these is that they create someone to blame, right, They create a sense of a group of evil doers, like working in secret against the common good, you know, kind of classic conspiracy stuff. And so folding in new disease outbreaks into that is useful, It's helpful. It creates a common energy, someone to blame,
someone to get mad at. And as we saw with for instance, QAnon, you know, the basis of the qnon conspiracy theory was that Donald Trump was doing a really good job, but that a group of evil doers were working against him and we're undermining him. So this idea of a deep state or a sinister group of scientists or some other kind of group of villains thwarting what Donald Trump is trying to do is a useful idea if, for instance, Donald Trump is having trouble getting things done.
So it's sort of way to give him an out if he can't do some of the things he might want to do.
Yeah, just sort of like preemptively create a set of let's say too, yeah, a set of villains, a set of factors that could be used to create an out or you know, an alternate explanation for anything that does not happen during the next Rump administration. Because he's making really big promises, and so are people who are going to be in administration.
Broad expensive, hard to maneuver promises totally.
You know, I mean, when you say that you're going to solve all of these issues on day one, whether it is the war in Ukraine, the war in Gaza. You know, if you're Robert F. Kennedy Junior and you're claiming that you're going to end ill.
Health, whatever that means, it's pretty vague.
Yeah, but yeah, I mean, these are incredibly broad claims, and if you can't get them done, then it would be great to be able to blame someone in advance.
So let's just for another minute talk about why I'm wondering if you could explain to us sort of one of the things that I've.
Been destruck by when we talk about our Cage Junior.
Part of K Junior actually brought a group into MAGA world.
They are really the other side of the horseshoe in a lot of ways. I'm hoping you could talk.
About sort of who RFK Junior's people are and why they exist.
Right.
First of all, I should plug Conspiratuality, the podcasts that talks about the kind of incursion of right and far right beliefs into the New Age health and wellness world if you're curious about this, because they've done really great work over the years talking about the ways that these different characters kind of appear and join forces. But you know, the first thing that Kennedy was in his adult life was an environmental lawyer, and the second thing was an
anti vaccine activist. He's claimed that he got involved in the vaccine issue in like two thousand and five because you know, concerned mother came to him. But he has created a really outsized public image in the anti vaccine world as a crusader for their health right and has like a real intense fandom in the anti vaccine world, especially among mothers who believe that their children were harmed
by vaccines. And because he's built this incredibly like adoring fan base, a lot of them were just automatically like willing to follow him when he began this kind of presidential run in this political career, willing to advocate for
his campaign. And then when his campaign started to founder and he decided to suspend it and endorse Donald Trump, he made what was a pretty canny sort of marketing decision and started promoting this idea of the make America Healthy Again movement in Maha, and Maha was meant to be a way to kind of unite the concerns of Trump voters and sort of Kennedy fans under one umbrella.
And it's not always like the most comfortable relationship, you know, Like Kennedy is obviously a pretty big proponent of what he considers to be healthy foods. There was that viral image of him sitting uncomfortably at a table with Donald Trump and some other people, you know, with McDonald's in front of him, looking uncomfortable.
It.
You know, it's not always like the most natural kind of marriage between these two sides, but they do share some things in common, chiefly the sense that the government regulates too much, especially around food safety.
Right, which is ironic because part of the problem here when you think about like microplastics, the kind of thing wouldn't that be a lack of government regulation.
Yeah, I mean, so this is interesting because both the Maha people and the more died in the wole Trump people do share this sense of government overreach and this idea that, yeah, that the government is doing too much and regulates too much around food and around medication. But yeah, when we talk about a lot of the goals that Kennedy wants to achieve, they are more about better and
further regulation of food safety. I mean, he also sort of falsely claims that vaccines are unsafe, that they are not tested, that they are not regulated in a way
that other drugs are, none of which is true. But again, like to me, that sounds like he's making an argument for more government oversight, not less right, but you know, as the nominee for the head of AHHS, you know, it seems like a lot of what he's talking about is cutting funding and regulation and sort of like taking away funding, especially from agencies that he considers to be corrupt, like the NIH and the CDC.
So that's where raw milk comes into it. Can you talk about raw milk?
Yeah, specifically raw milk. Where it relates to Kennedy is he did this kind of viral tweet a while ago where he was talking about all of the things that he wants to reduce oversight of or you know, enforcement actions against when he's the head of the AHHS. In October, he had this kind of viral tweet where he said, you know, the Fday's war on public health is about
to end. This includes its aggressive suppression of psychedelics, peptides, stem cells, raw milk, hyperbaric therapies, kulating compound, impromectin, hydroxy clark, when vitamins, clean food, sunshine, exercise, nutriceuticals, and anything else that advances human health and can't be patented by pharma. Right, and he's been super critical.
Of the war on sunshine.
Yeah, of course, right, But yeah, he's been super critical of the FDA, and the USDA is sort of enforcement actions against raw milk distributors when they are either taking stuff across state lines or when you know, testing reveals the presence of a flu, as it has recently. So yeah, he's made it pretty clear that he considers raw milk to be a health food that is inappropriately suppressed by the federal government.
So interesting. Yeah, the war on sunlight is a real one. So it's funny because this is so stupid. But then also there's a certain like can you make the raw milk and the ball of Arena farm stuff makes sense for us. I think you have to explain Ballerina Farm for the few, the few lucky people who don't know what.
This is, right, So, Vallerina Farm is a woman in whose real name is Hannah Neilman. Basically, she's a social media influencer. She's often referred to as a tradwife, though I think she denies that, like she doesn't identify with
that designation. She is a woman who with her husband, owns a farm in Utah and sells meat and sells sourdos starter and kind of cultivates a what to me seems like a tradwive aesthetic on social media, where she has like a million, Oh, I'm sorry, she has ten million Instagram followers and nine million on TikTok.
I actually don't know what.
Her stance is specifically on raw Milk, but I would say that the tradwives, like some of the Raw Milk influencers, sort of present themselves as advocating for an older, healthier, more sort of a nostalgic view of health and wellness that harkens back to an earlier and better and more innocent time basically.
For the modern life.
I mean, the idea is that somehow modernity has ruined American life.
Yeah, and we see that right in all kinds of different areas, whether it is masculinity influencers talking about feminism as the corrosive force, whether it's tribal wives also talking about feminism as a corrosive force, whether it is mister Kennedy saying that, you know, US health and safety agencies are sort of inappropriately regulating things that we're seen as healthy in previous eras, though of course that's not true
for things like hyperberic occiden chambers or chelating compounds. We've been pasteurizing milk for a really long time because we learned that it makes it much more difficult to get things like tuberculosis listeriosis.
Like, yeah, yes, we have really ended up through the rabbit hole here.
I'd love you to talk just for two seconds about the polio vaccine.
So basically, there's a story in The New York Times this week about how an attorney named Arion Siri, who's a big player in the anti vaccine movement and who's kind of linked to mister Kennedy and some other big anti vaccine players like Dell big Tree, he filed a petition for the government to revoke its approval of one of the polio vaccines that is currently used in the United States. He's also filed petitions seeking to pause the
distribution of other vaccines, including COVID vaccines. So this is the long shot. Currently, this is not something that the federal government would do, especially not for the specific polio vaccine that was used in the United States. So it is just widely considered to be extremely safe, very effective. It is incredibly rare for children or adults in the
US to get polio anymore, which it didn't used to be. Basically, Aaron Siri represents a group called I CAN, which is owned by Dell Big Trees and anti vaccine Actiputs who worked for Robert F. Kennedy Junior's campaign, and these petitions to revoke authorization of these certain vaccines are being put out by I CAN. So basically, right now, the idea that the FDA would read petitions and be like, yeah,
we should do that is incredibly far fetched. With Robert F. Kennedy Junior over AHHS, which is over the FDA, maybe that would change. So it's more kind of about at this point signaling what the priorities are for allies of mister Kennedy if he is confirmed and sworn in as head of AHHS.
This is such completely insane I should laugh. I laugh to keep from crying. Thank you, thank you, thank you, thank you for coming on.
Yeah, thank you for having me.
Daniel Lakatian is the editor of Bolt's bagazine.
Welcome back to Fast Politics, Daniel, talk us through state legislatures, what's going on?
Talk us through elections? You're my election guy, among others.
Well, thanks for having me again.
It's yeah, a lot has changed since since I last talked to you.
Quich probably was before the election.
We had bolts where I work reading low closely at the state level, at the county level, which you know, it doesn't get as much attention as obviously the federal elections. Very understandable reasons, but when it comes to you know, when it comes to a lot of things that people really care about, including emotion rights, including civil rights, really thinks that are going to be at the center of
the next two to four years. States are everything, especially if you're a progressive, trying to find places where there could be pushback, you know, cases where whether legal or political, that's really word to look. And so a lot of what we've done is look at state houses, state senates and also state Supreme Court. So to just start with state senates and state houses. You know what I did in the in the past few weeks is quite is
just go state by state. Look in every state, how did the composition of state chambers change, And that's really going to determine what yours have opened and closed in the next year.
I want to pause for a minute and just for our listeners explain. You know, we're all feeling pretty moralized and these state legislatures are a way to take power back. They're not expensive. They are happening, you know, on off cycles. So and these off yr elections are ones where low turnout rules and a little money can make a big difference. So anyways, start talking to me about these state legislators.
Yeah.
No.
So the first sort of big number that I thought was interesting is I quite literally look at the swing of state seats if you take into account all the races across the country, which obviously is a bit of a silly exercise because there isn't ever an institution where every state lawmaker from Alaska to Florida gets in the room, right, But there were rough six thousand elections happening for state lawmaker around the country, and out of this six thousand,
the GOP gained fifty seven seats. That's a small number, I mean, obviously, you know, it suggests that the UOPE had the better nights, and if you look at the detail, which we could do in a second, they had some big wins, but if you look at the overall composition, it was quite small given the extent of the shift. Obviously in the presidential election. So this is another instance like in the US House, where the coattails of Trump were were much smaller than one might expect, and Democrats
clearly got a lot of bright spots as well. Republicans gained seats in twenty states and Democrats gained seats in eleven states. Again, the GOP had the better night, but we do see in a bunch of states where Democrats are the ones who gained seats and are in a better spot going into twenty twenty five.
So let's talk about those states.
Yeah, yeah, So let's talk of the two most interesting spots because in Wisconsin and Montana. Wisconsin and Montana had new maps this year for the first time, and they were more equitable maps than the ones that they were
using in twenty twenty twenty. In Wisconsin is probably the one that a lot of people who are who might listen to this have heard about, because there was a huge court fight in Wisconsin around the gerrymanders that Republican tasked in the early twenty tens and early twenty twenties to re locked in their majorities in the state House
and the state Senate. And it took I mean, it was a very expensive election for the state Supreme Court in twenty twenty three got a lot of attention in April twenty three, which is just a year and a half to go, and the candidates supported by Democrats there won and flipped the Court to the left for the
first time in a long time. And then the Court shruck down the GOP gerrymanders that was a year ago, and the new map was created and lo and behold that that the map created a lot of change, as you would expect, because we went from a very aggressive up jeromander to a fair map. And over in the state, Democrats gained fourteen seats in Wisconsin, so that's the biggest
gain they made anywhere in the country. Republicans kept their majority in both chambers, but they're small majorities compared to the quasi supermajorities they had, and it sets Democrats up very well for twenty twenty six for trying to flip control of Wisconsin for the first time in a long time. And there's a somewhat similar story in Montana, which is quite interesting because the defeat of John Tester in the
race for the US Senate was a huge story. Obviously, on election night at the state level, Democrats gained twelve seats across both chambers and up's supermajorities, which is actually quite important because the GOP was hoping to use its supermajorities to put constitutional amendments on the ballots on party line votes.
Basically, they somehow flipped the Senate seed but lost the majority in the House.
No, they did not lose the majority. Germany ten seats in the state House, and that seems like a lot that it's a big change.
Again, it's it has to do with the districting fighter that was describing earlier, but the one that didn't come randomly. There was a whole fight and another point of contact Smalledgy. To just show you the depth of how everything is related.
There were elections for the state court in the state of Montana, and Montana might be a very unusual state in for a red state, in that it has a state court, the state High Court the Supreme Court that leans to the left and has repeatedly struck down GOP bills in the last few years, including a restriction on abortion, including restrictions on voting access, and conservatives were hoping to really change that left lean of the.
Court and that didn't succeed.
Actually, there was a key race there that the Democratic affiliated candidate won, So there is still going to be this bucket of resistance in the state government, which is going to be the state Court, and therefore that's why the GOPS lost to the super majority there is important because they're not going to be able to go around the court and just put stuff on the ballot at well. So that's going to be very interesting situation in coming years.
Yeah, that is very interesting, all right, So talk to me about other state launche stuff. So the bright spots Montana and what else.
Wisconsin one of the two biggest ones. So there are others where Democrats gained seats, but the GOP also had just to be clear of very bright spots. The two main stories to just highlight are that the GOP erased the majorities that Democrats had for the past couple of years in the House in Michigan and the Minnesota House.
And in both cases, Democrats had just won control the full government in twenty twenty two, which you might remember as a huge story because no one expected Democrats to to gain power during the mid term, and the GOP gained just enough seats in both states to erase Democratic majorities in the House. That doesn't mean that the Republicans have control the state government because Democrats have in both
states the governorship and the state Senate. But it does stop, obviously, the ability of Democrats to pass laws at will with their own votes. In Michigan and Minnesota, those are states that they used to do. They did a lot of stuff in the last couple of years, a lot of which made headlines. Just as an example, you know the free lunches and schools that Governor Waltz signed. Governor Walts also signed a voting rights Act at the state level. So all of those sort of policies were done because
of the trafficta Democrats had. So those are the main spot and then the other one I will name is that in New England Republicans did. They gained in three states, especially the state of Vermont, the state of Vermont, where Republicans gained twenty five seats in the state House and state Senate in Vermont and broke the supermajorities Democrats had. The governor there is a Republican so that's going to really tie the hands of Democrats to be able to override the veto's.
The republican governor there.
Let's talk about what the calendar looks like, now, what's coming up?
First?
I have this theory that I want you to either tell me is wrong or right.
Okay, So I have this theory that the way.
This election went wasn't actually Republican Democrat brand, that it was Trump then Democrats than Republicans. And so one of the phenomenons I saw when I looked at some of these numbers from swing states was that you had states where Trump got over fifty percent of the vote, then they must have left the ticket blank. And I'm wondering if you can talk about that phenomenon as it like, did you see when you look through the data, did you see voters who were just Trump and no one else voters?
That's a great question. I don't have numbers to share on the undervote that you're asking about, but I think there's evidence to suggest so, I mean, I think your question gets to the very first thing I said, right, which is that here I was just talking about Michigan and Wisconsin, the states that saw a big swing one way or the other, but in most of the country. It's what the most startling thing as I literally went state by state and not just state by state by
chamber by chamber. The most startling thing to me, that the clear story that jumped out is that in so many chambers the status quo was almost entirely intact, that there was either no change at all or the most minimal change. And I mean, I think the most striking example is Pennsylvania, which maybe gets to what you're saying. So let's just recap what happened in Pennsylvania. Obviously, Trump
won the state, flipping it on the presidential level. It also flipped at the congressional level because Republicans ousted the Democratic senator there, and they also gained seats in the US House. Now let's go down one level, and this is honestly one of the most I don't have a particularly great explanation, but it's so startling. Not a single seat changed hands in the state House. Out of two
hundred and three seats. Pennsylvania Democrats had a majority harder than two to one hundred and one going into the election, and they're going to have a majority harder than two ton and one exiting the election. That is quite striking given the given the shifts at the federal level that did not translate when people were voting, and for their state House, and we see this over and over again.
The number I came up with was that the twenty eight chambers saw zero change after holding elections this year, and a lot of others only saw a single seat shift. That is a lot of stability underlying what you know. Has often been covered as like a great night for the GOP, a landslide for Trump, but etcetera, which the numbers don't really support. Obviously the GOP had the better night, there's no question. What I will say is Republicans have a lot of reasons to be happy right out of
November fifth. So they're not going to ask each other a lot of questions, which is understandable because.
They overall won.
But if you look at what they should ask themselves how they weren't able to flip the state House in Pennsylvania despite the state shifting to Trump. They should ask themselves, right how Perry Lake lost by so much worse than Trump in there on a Senate race. For a third consecutive cycles, the GOP lost the Senate seat in Arizona, and this time was an open race, with Trump winning the state by six points, and yet they lost the
Senate race. There's a lot of questions for the GOP to ask itself, and it's not going to ask itself that because.
Take one the big one.
But there's a lot of different storylines if you dig right.
Yes, exactly.
And it is striking to me with Pennsylvania because you must have had some people vote for Trump and then Democrats on the bottom of the ticket.
Right, well, yes, no, of course, the question of whether it was people splitting tickets or under voting is not something I can speak to. But there definitely was ticket splitting there, and there was a lot of obviously ticket splitting in other states. I mean, just to name one other state not overwhelm listeners, but North Carolina is a great example where Democrats won the governor's race in the midst of a giant scandal that engulfed the Republican But
they also want other state races. They won the AG race by a surprising margin. They want other state level races. They won by a very small margin a race for the state Court, and they broke the GOP super majority in the state House, which is going to prevent the Republicans in twenty twenty five of overriding the vetos of the incoming governor, and as you may have seen, the
Republican is not taking that very well. They're quite there this week trying to ram through a bill that would effectively gut some of the essential roles of the current governor and transferred to Republican authority because they only have a few weeks left of being able to use their supermajorities and they're trying to make the most of it.
Yeah, exactly, very strange and interesting. So tell us where we should keep our eyes peeled now, talk to us about the future.
Yeah, there's always a lot. It's a lot happening.
The very first thing to know, if people want to know about sort of elections going forward, is that they're a special elections happening in January and early twenty twenty five in Michigan and Virginia for important seats in the state.
And the governorship.
Governorship is going to be in in November, but there are races in January, like literally around the corner that will decide whether Democrats keep control of the state tenets in Virginia and Michigan, and those those are very important. And then yes, obviously the big one in twenty twenty five is the governor's race in the state of Virginia. That is going to be an open race because the
governor is not allowed to run for reelection. Democrats will want to take that governorship back, which would give potentially give them control they state government there that they lost a few years ago. That's really a big one to watch in Virginia. And the other the second big sort of state wide race in twenty twenty five is the Supreme Court race in Wisconsin. So that's actually happening in April, and I already talked a bunch about why that court
has been so important in the past. A liberal justice is not running for reelection in April, and conservutives have a shot at flipping the court back to the right in Wisconsin. Expect that to be extremely expensive race. It's sort of going to be on its own on the calendar. There's nothing around it happening. The stakes are very high on abortion rights in Wisconsin, on redistricting in Wisconsin. That's really where the next big campaign is likely to be.
And also, you know, at this point, the US House is so tight, we're all that any special election, any retirement, any vacancy would just be a huge deal, right because if what once it flips, that actually has huge consequences.
What it has right now, it's good or at least it's going to be two seventeen to two fifteen. Right.
So the results of November fifth were two twenty two, two fifteen, and Trump named three people from the Republican caucus and then Gates was one of them, and then he resigned.
But is not going to be in the House. It's not going to be aged anyway.
Yes, So that gets us as two seventeen to fifty for now until the special elections.
Just as a reminder to listeners, you can't tie in the House of Representatives.
You tie, you lose.
So it means that effectively Mike Johnson has a one seat majority.
And at that point it's not just who has won or who is in Congress, it's who is sick that they who has a wedding to attend in Michigan, who has you know, we we already saw that in the last few years, where an absence could have huge consequences in what's happening. And that's going to be a lot more intense in coming months.
And actually, if you want to get furious, I was talking to a member who was saying to me, you know, Democrats have a couple of people who haven't been to Congress in a while, of coorse, who are actually like legitimately sick and who can't get there.
But who probably should not be in office anymore.
Now that said, Republicans also have that, But that is quite infuriating.
Yes, I wish I had pulled the median age of people in Congress.
By what you're saying doesn't surprise me.
Yeah, you know, look there's a Nancy Pelosi eighty tray and then there's you know, some of those people are not so old, but they are sick and they need to leave if they're if they're too sick to get to work, you know.
To also maybe to give a parallel point as to how tight the margin is, because we were taught talking earlier about re district thing, right, and we redistricting in the state of Wisconsin in particular. So let's just talk about redistricting in North Carolina for a moment, because the exact inverse of what happened in Wisconsin happened in North Carolina in twenty twenty two. Republicans flipped that state Supreme Court and they struck down a prior ruling that had
stopped the GOP from passing their own maps. And so what happened is that the GOP in North Carolina passed new maps for twenty twenty four and that flipped three seats, three seats and the margin in the House out of the number fifth. If three seats hadn't flipped, the Democrats
would have been the majority party. So it's just so interesting to trace back the current Republican majority not just to the new map in North Carolina, but also as a result to the state court elections that happen in twenty twenty two.
Now, we don't think.
About the state court races as that relevant maybe to federal politics or to the national politics, but here's a case where literally the state level races for this for state judges are directly responsible for a new map that is directly responsible for who has the majority right now in US House. So you know, that really explains maybe to people why the coming election in Wisconsin is going to be so expensive and why in twenty twenty six, you know, you should repay attention to what's happening.
At the state level in these elections.
So interesting.
Thank you for coming on Daniel, I hope.
You'll come back, of course, thanks for having me.
That's it for this episode of Fast Politics. Tune in every Monday, Wednesday, Thursday and Saturday to hear the best minds and politics make sense of all this chaos. If you enjoy this podcast, please send it to a friend and keep the conversation going.
Thanks for listening.