Zohran Mamdani’s Win Is A Political Earthquake + How Will America Regulate Artificial Intelligence?

a seismic earthquake inside the Democratic Party, and that is the victory by Zoron Mom Donnie in the Democratic primary, apparent victory. I mean, we got to remind folks we still haven't had the retabulation in the New York City mayor's race. You know, let me throw a bizarre what

if out there. There's an assumption, and I think it's a correct assumption based on the polling we've seen and certainly the campaign strategies the candidates had of trying to convince their supporters not to even rank Cuomo in some places and things like that. But let me just throw out a here. If Cuomo closes the gap to just a couple of points and ends up losing the primary after rank choice voting more like that fifty one to

forty nine or fifty two forty eight. Is that what they're waiting for to see whether Cuomo will decide to run in a general election. But look, let's it. Certainly everybody is behaving today as if that's not going to happen in that Mandani is going to be the Democratic nominee. The question is what kind of general election is it going to be. But before we get to that, on

the New York City side of things, it's been interesting how Democrats have reacted, right it's around the country. You've had some in New York, including the two leading Democratic figures in New York who happen to hold the two most important positions in Congress for the Democrats, Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer and House Democratic Leader Akim Jeffries. They both congratulated Mandani, but they did not endorse Mamdani. Maybe they will eventely, but they have not made that decision yet.

Bernie Sanders came out gloated and said, Hey, the Democratic establishment has some explaining to do, and I really think they do. In fact, I want to quote a column that I thought was just outstanding, and it sort of, I think, summed up how the Democrats have really blew this when it came to when it came to how they've gotten involved over the last couple of cycles. It was a column written by Julie Roginsky, and it was

it was expressing her frustration. And I'm going to read it in part here word for word, because these are her words, not my words. What were voters in New York to do? This is what she wrote. When I filled out my ballot yesterday, I did not rank either Cuomo or a Mom Dannie because I, again her words, I won't vote for a sexual predator, and because I won't vote for a deeply inexperienced candidate who refuses to knowledge that quote globalized the Intifada is an offensive term

to his Jewish constituents. She adds, I knew that my vote was wasted, that the five people I ranked had no shot of winning, and for this I blame the Democratic establishment. And she goes on when Cuomo popped up his head to run, all the establishment figures who flocked to him could have said no, They could have looked at other competent leaders who did not have Cuomo's baggage. Raginsky suggests Police Commissioner Jessica Tish was somebody that came

to mind. I've heard that name quite a bit today. Instead, they did what they do best, tried to impose a deeply flawed candidate with a disconnected message on their own voters. Let me repeat that last phrase, because this, to me is the key to how the Democratic Party has lost its way. They tried to impose a deeply flawed candidate with a disconnected message on their own voters. Hmmm, where have they done that before? Oh? Maybe restraight presidential elections.

Remember this is a Democratic party and a Democratic establishment that has chosen candidates on behalf of the voters and not let the voter's way in in a good decade, right, trust me. If the Democratic establishment had its way, Hillary Clinton would have been the nominee in two thousand and eight. But they let that go. There wasn't. In fact, some of the establishment were divided enough that hey, Obama and Clinton both had affair shot at it, and the voters

chose Obama in twenty sixteen. The voters weren't given that kind of choice. Barack Obama put his arm around Hillary Clinton. It convinced a whole slew of other potential candidates not to run, and only this unknown senator from Vermont decided to throw his hat in the ring. Bernie Sanders. People forget Bernie Sanders did not have any sort of name

ID back then. The question has always been did his message truly resonate or was the fact that he wasn't Hillary Clinton why he resonated or was it a combination of the two. But things sort of went her way, and there was a feeling that the Democratic primary voters really didn't get a fair shot to decide who they really wanted as their nominee because the establishment essentially shoved a whole generation of Democrats aside. All right, an entire generation.

Let's move to twenty twenty Joe Biden. This time, there were a whole slew and then COVID hit and the establishment came in, and there was a fear that what a progressive named Bernie Sanders was going to win this nomination if a whole bunch of people didn't quickly get out and consolidate around Joe Biden. A m clobashar got out and consolidated around Joe Biden, Beto O'Rourke did, Pete Budaget did, and there was this consolidation. Again, the establishment spoke.

Jim Clyburn did his famous endorsement, and they spoke, and then they did it again in twenty four. Right first, the establishment said, anybody that dare question Joe Biden's capability of doing a second term is only doing the bidding

of Donald Trump. Just look at how that Dean Phillips, the former member of Congress who did decide to challenge Biden, who openly said he didn't want to be the candidate running but believed but it would if nobody else would step in, and he tried to recruit plenty of governors to do just that. Nobody would get in the Establishment labeled him some sort of secret Trump surrogate. Okay, they

were able to protect Biden, and of course we now know what happened, and the voters never got to choose Kamala Harris. Kamala Harris was essentially chosen for them as the nominee. And this is essentially what Julie Roginsky is saying happened in New York City. For the life of me, and I've written about this. You can go back a couple of substack colms and go, why the heck did Andrew Cuomo just sort of get o laid into this field?

And I think it really does mean that the establishment, whether it's guys like Chuck Schumer, King Jeffrey's other major Democrats, just didn't fully appreciate how unpopular Andrew Cuomo was. Thought, well, his name, I d the amount of money he'll raise, he's got. You know, older voters, they'll vote for the familiar name. It'll be too hard to push him out. We don't want to have that fight with him. That's

only going to be ugly too. So they just sort of acquiesced when it was obvious he had major character flaws and the fact that he never apologized for what happened or explained himself in an honest and straightforward way, and instead said he regretted resigning. You know, I wrote this. I regret that he resigned too, because he he didn't

get due process, and the voters never got due process. And this is why I think if you resign in order to avoid an investigation, whether it's a House ethics committee or it's an impeachment inquiry, in your state legislature, be barred from running for any office for a decade because you're breaking your compact with voters. You were elected to do a job for four years and you're walking away in less than four years. There should be some penalty,

but there was none. Guess what, there's a penalty. Now his political career is over. Now does he contemplate running as independent? He might, But do you really want to take two losses? Look, I will say this with Mam Dannie. I think I think you're sort of seeing two reactions

right now. You have a whole bunch of Democrats try not to say anything. You have an entire Republican messaging machine that is trying to weaponize Mamdanni and turn him into you know, the grandson of Vladimir Lenin and trying to make the hammer and sickle, you know, call him a communist and all of these things. And look, and

I've warned and I've showed you this. If you don't think this is an effective strategy, if Democrats don't know how to figure out how both to embrace embrace his victory and at the same time say hey, we disagree on this issue, this issue, in this issue or some form of that. They're going to tie themselves into knots and they're going to essentially allow the weaponization to take hold.

All you have to do, and this is what I pointed out yesterday is look at what happened to the Democrats in the state of Florida when they nominated somebody friendly with democratic socialism. The S word just totally destroyed the Democratic brand in Florida, and now Florida is a red state. The fact is that the Mayor of New York City is I would argue, the second or third most famous elected official in the country. I promise you if you did it, you know over time, after the

president and vice president. I think that most people have a better shot at naming the Mayor of New York City than the Speaker of the House. So it is one of the more symbolically, certainly one of the bigger names. And that's why this is symbolically such a huge victory. But it is, it absolutely is. I think the it's the first shot in the big fight between sort of the mainstream wing of the Democratic Party. If you want to call it again, they need a better descriptor. Right.

Establishment is a terrible thing. Nobody wants to be the establishment. Sounds like they're the incumbent. You know, if you say mainstream, it sounds like you're saying there. You know, it's so.

And as far as the voters were concerned, Mom, Donnie's the mainstream, or he wouldn't have won the nomination. So I think that's I will admit there needs to be so you know, center left, maybe we call it that the center left Democrats, the non progressive Democrats. They've they don't know, they've got to sort of stop supporting ancient names,

you know, family dynasties. And I think part of it is you sort of have an actre feed class of Democrats who I think are being advised by the same you know, five or six consultants, They get their funding from the same five or six sources, and it becomes sort of I think they've become their own bubble and they fully don't see it. And yes, the positions that

Mamdani holds are not popular overall with swing voters. The ideas are, but sort of the paying for them are right, Like okay, free groceries, Yeah, how does that going to work? And who pays for it? I do think that he is going to Mamdani. If he does become mayor, is going to somebody's going to educate him that the tax base of New York City is actually, you know, seventy to eighty percent of it comes from a very small group of people, and be careful taxing them to the

point where they decide to leave. Now, I think some of this stuff's overblown, right, like all the people that we're going to flee to Canada if Donald Trump got to like that, I don't think. I think ninety five

percent of the people that claim they're leaving New York City if Mom Donnie becomes mayor, are not going to leave. But the story is not you know, it's not a good narrative. It's certainly not a good you know, a good look, and you're going to have a lot of squeaky Wall Street people. But if your mom Donnie politically, if Wall Street's upset, then you're winning, right as far

as your voters are concerned. So you got how he had to actually be careful if you're in the if you're in the wealthy wing of the Democratic Party or the wealthy wing of New York City, how you go about criticizing I speak to you Bill Ackman, who I don't think has a full self awareness gene in him at all times. And so I, you know, I do think that that that some of the complaints come across as, oh, it must be tough for you, for you folks that have to fly private in and out of New York City,

But you know it is. Look, it is a party

that's very nervous about more about the fact that they have no confidence in their own party at figuring out how to embrace mom Donnie without owning all of his positions. The fact of the matter is a Republican Party struggled with this with Donald Trump from twenty fifteen, twenty sixteen, and twenty seventeen until guess what, Donald Trump just eviscerated

the establishment. Look at the people that were still around, right, You had this sort of uncomfortable alliance between sort of the Paul Ryan wing that was still alive in twenty seventeen and twenty eighteen and the Donald Trump wing of the party. Well, five years later, all of those folks are gone. It's Donald Trump's party. Are there still some few remaining members of that old establishment? Rich McConnell's on

his way out. John Thune is trying hard not to look like he's part of the old guard, and we'll see John Cornyn is struggling. As you can see, he's about perhaps going to see the end his political career. He's somebody that's been around. So it may be that what Republicans dealt with in twenty fourteen to twenty sixteen maybe what's going to be happening here and maybe this is the beginning of a revolt of sort of a

secondary revolution of sorts. I do want to point out another piece of commentary that I retweeted earlier today, but I want to read. It comes from somebody who's going to be on the podcast pretty soon, Kristen Sultis Anderson. She's a Republican polster, really good, and she highlighted this quote from Politico's Playbook. It was from an anonymous centrist Democrat. It was a hot take, and it was this quote.

It is extremely alarming that the only candidates who genuinely excite our voters are the ones making absolutely insane promises on politically toxic positions, one strategist tells Playbook, leaving us in the spot of trying to execute on bad policy and losing terribly or failing to keep our promises and

reinforcing the idea that all politics is bullshit. Well, Kristen Sultius Anderson put this little note above that quote, and she said, change the party label from DEM to GOP. And this reminds me of a quote you'd read in the summer of twenty fourteen. Well, the summer of twenty fourteen, right, was the sort of the second big tea party election, right, that last midterm of Obama. And it really those that came in there. Josh Holly was a twenty fourteen elected Republican,

for instance. The beginnings of what is now sort of the mainstream MAGA coalition that is very supportive of the Trump agenda started to come in in twenty a little bit in twenty ten, more so in twenty fourteen, and it was the same concerns you had. Mainstream Republicans. Establishment Republicans just panicked, and some of these candidates were so bad it did cost them Senate races.

time they ran. But as you saw, over time, eventually those candidates were able to become seen as mainstream Republicans as Donald Trump changed the Republican Party electorate itself, right, what you know, those Republicans that rejected some of those Tea Party candidates in twenty fourteen, for many of them, that was the last time they voted Republican. Right, They

ended up becoming the new suburban Democratic voters. And this is the challenge that I think the Democratic Party has. They have been growing support in the wealthier suburbs around pretty much every major metropolitan arean America. But these folks are not keen on the policies of democratic socialists, you know. So this is going to be the uncomfortable alliance that I don't know how the two of them are going to coexist. Perhaps there's a way that happens. Maybe it's

a temporary alliance. You know, for a long time, this stuff was papered over by just being angry at Donald Trump. But I think now after sort of eight years of conducting campaigns that paper over this divide between essentially a business wing of the Democratic Party and a progressive populist wing of the Democratic Party that really I think culturally they see things eye to eye and some social issues, but not on economic policy, and this is where there's

this sharp divide and a little bit unfeigned policy. But you know, I think sometimes we over highlight the Israel issue as a primary voting issue. There's not a lot of evidence that voters themselves vote on this issue. That instead they're voting on pocketbook issues. So you know, perhaps now now that Trump I mean, look, Cuomo tried to use the Trump card in order to gain traction with Democratic primary voters, and it's pretty clear Democratic primary voters

are tired of that messaging. They want to hear something that's for them. They want to hear something that feels like fighting. They want to have something that feels like pushing back in one form or another. And I think that's what Mam Doni I think gave voters in a way that Cuomo never did. But this is where I think we all have to sort of take a breath. I don't think we can sit here and say for

sure that Mam Donnie's nomination is. It means the Democratic Party wants to go in a very progressive direction on economic policy. I think this right now one is not a trend. Let's see if this happens in multiple races, and then we can have another conversation. But I think this had more to do with in Cuomo becoming the quasi incumbent to voters right he was seeing the establishment and incumbency feels like one and the same these days.

He ran a terrible race. He wasn't talking about economic issues, and he also ran an old race. What do I mean by that? Well, they just ran an old campaign, a lot of TV ads, a lot of sort of slickness, sort of the sort of traditional events, getting the proper endorsements and proper endorsements like you know, Jim Clyburn worrying too much about those endorsements, versus a mom Donnie who by necessity had to come up with different ways to run because he didn't have that amount of money. Ran

a more modern twenty twenty esque the twenty twenties. What sort of media is today? Hey, I'm you know, independent media, streaming, whatever you want to refer to it. He was all of the above. He was showing up everywhere. He would certainly do plenty of legacy cable television, but he also would do plenty of new media as well. Cuomo wasn't doing any of that. I mean, I think I said it earlier. I believe he did two podcasts and one

of them was his brothers. Right. He wasn't exactly looking to talk to new vote and sort of let loose, and I think part of that, frankly, the reason they hit him, right, the reason we never saw Joe Biden is that they were afraid he really couldn't reassure people that he was all all on the up and up, which is why we rarely saw him in interviews, and he was very protected. I think with Cuomo, they just wanted to duck questions about the circumstances with which he

decided to resign his governorship. And that was a mistake, right, not confronting these things. You know, he could have taken a page from Trump's book and gone right at it and sort of owned it or not owned it, but dealt with it. Whatever you think of Trump, he tries to deal with all of it. Sometimes obviously, sometimes he

lies about it, makes up, but he's constantly trying to deal with it, and it sends a message to voters that he's at least acknowledging the elephant's plural in the room. Cuomo never did any of that, So I think I would caution, assuming this is some sort of leftboard lurch of the Democratic Party, what were the alternatives. He ran a better race, He talked about the issues that voters cared about. Cuomo was the front runner. He behaved like an incumbent, and he lost. He was sort of and

it felt like he was out of touch. He didn't even live in the city. He didn't even know how to His bagel order was an English muffin. I mean that alone, to some people, was grounds for never being elected mayor of New York City. So it is. You know, it's very possible that Mom Donnie won for very mundane reasons that have nothing to do with ideology and nothing to do with any big shift that bread and butter issues. One guy was talking about bread and butter and the

other one wasn't pure and simple. But here's what I would say. I do think that I think Senate Democrats, I think Democratic Party is a real problem with Chuck Schumer.

Right now I say this, it's going to sound like I'm picking on him, But you know there was a new candidate jumped into the US Senate race in Texas, and the first thing he did to say, you know he's running is a This is the astronaut, former astronaut who decided to run first time he's run for office, running as a Democrat, and he and he took a and he named Check Schumer as the Democrats who aren't doing enough, who aren't fighting, who don't know what they're doing,

Rocanna who wants himself a congressman out in Silicon Valley. Longtime listeners of the Chuck podcast know that I've had him on and we've we've we've we've, we've had conversations

a few times on this broadcast. He regularly named checks Schumer in a negative way these days as part of the problem on the he's becoming the punching bag for Democrats to show that they they are getting the message. So it's really I think he's becoming the now symbol. It's not Jeffries, it's not the DNC chair that probably most people can't remember the name of right now, it's Martin in case you're asking yourself right now, it is

sort of Chuck Schumer. Some of this maybe some of the criticism is unfair, but basically he is the remaining member of the sort of the group of Democrats that it feels like they've been running the party since Obama left. Right, you know, Clinton is no longer there, Biden is no longer there, but Chuck Schumer. You know, Nancy Pelosi is no longer there, but Chuck Schumer is still there. Right, Harry Reid is no longer there, but Chuck Schumer is

still there. Stanny Hoyer is no longer there, but Chuck Schumer is still there. So he is I think going to become an even bigger magnet. The question. Now, the Senate Democrats are very you know senators in general, they're not They don't they don't act rashly. You know, they usually are very They want to they want to take their time on dealing with things. So I don't know that he's in trouble and that there would be some move against him. In fact, it would be very unsenate

like to see something like this. But I'll tell you that conversation I had with the Democratic senator very recently who was really upset that Michael Bennett decided to run for governor, and I think I shared this with you that a form of this, but it was this senator was saying, look, we've got to replace Schumer. We all know it, but there's no obvious person. I thought Michael

Bennett was the obvious replacement, and and and the senator you know, said, look, you know, he decided he wanted to be governor. He's frustrated working in the Senate. He gets it, but you know, you know, it's sort of like if you're going to shoot the king, who you're going to replace him with? Right? You know? Is it? And if you're thinking about running for president in the US Senate, the last thing you want to be is

in leadership. Right, maybe it's better off of Brian Shatz, who is a Senator from Hawaii who seems to be one of the few that has figured out how to how to talk to both the progressive wing of the party in a in a way that's authentic and the and the and the sort of center left wing of the party party where I think he's decidedly a bit

more progressive. But it's very respectful. You know, when you replace Daniel inn Away in the Senate, you're sort of respectful of how of the different wings of the party itself. It might behove the party to essentially listen to the base of the party and say, you know, and here's the thing. Schumer's one of the most self aware politicians

I've ever met. He has made ruthless decisions in the past, nominees to let loose in Senate races where you're just trying to save the Senate in another state and you can't fulfill a promise. He knows how to make tough decisions. He's done it before. He's pulled the plug on candidacies that you know, made a lot of people mad. But somebody has to make those decisions. There might be a moment where the best thing for him to be is

to sort of say, you know what, I shouldn't. You know, nobody saying he should leave the Senate, but that he steps aside as party leader and sort of sends the message that the Democrats do want to sort of turn

the page, do want a new set of leaders. I think Jeffreys is still considered new to the post, right, I mean, and Nancy Pelosi is still there right, still sort of walks the halls and some I've talked to some House Democrats who think that she's she needs to lay lower than she has been, and she's actually laid pretty low here. It is interesting who did decide to endorse,

who did decide to endorse Mom Donnie today and who did not. The first member of the New York City Congressional delegation to endorse Mom Donnie Jerry Nadler, and he's he is Jewish. It's a big endorsement. He called it a seismic election. He compared Mom Donnie's victory to Obama's victory.

And here's what he said when it came. He said on and whether he had any concerns about some previous statements that Mam Donna he had made as a Jewish American, and he said, quote, I've spoken to him today about his commitment to fighting anti Semitism, and we'll work with all New Yorkers to fight against all bigotry and hate. And that's what I'm going to be curious to see. I think Mom Donnie, we're going to find out. You know, sometimes insurgent candidacies don't know how to then not be

an insurgent like Bernie Sanders. I would argue, he's now an establishment leader of the party. But he never wants to be seen as an establishment member of the party, which is why he continues to back out of his promises. He is multiple times promised he was going to register as a Democrat and never did because I don't think he ever wants to be seen as quote unquote part of the establishment. But you could argue, because he's been the leader of the progressive movement arguably now for a decade,

that he is certainly the establishment member of that. But look, I do think that there's he's never been able to

figure out how to be bigger than just his movement. This is going to be a challenge from mom Donnie. Right. Governing that city is incredibly difficult. It has been referred to as the second hardest job in politics. And he actually has an opportunity here over the next three or four months where the bar's kind of low, right, you're going to have a lot of skeptical moderates, skeptical business leaders about him. How does he he's had an opportunity to sort of make a new first impression with some

of these folks. What's he like behind the scenes, right, you know, it's sort of like sometimes insurgent politicians don't know how to be sort of diplomats. When you have to be a diplomat, you need to sometimes do diplomacy even in domestic politics. Right, it's a challenge that's taking place in Syria with the new president there. Right, he was a rebel and then suddenly you're now in charge and you have to govern everybody, including people that may

not have wanted you in that position. Can you meet the moment, can you handle the moment, and can you say no to a supporter if it's for the greater good? Right, So it'll be interesting to see that challenge, see how he handles that challenge going forward. But look, there's no doubt about it. This is an earthquake. And one final point I'll make on this, I did a little quick research here. There are fifteen members of Congress that are seventy years old or older. I do think Mom Donnie's

victory is going to inspire primary challenges to many of these folks. And if you've been in Congress, you're over the age of seventy and you've been in Congress more than two decades, you really ought to look in the mirror and ask yourself whether you really do you want to end this way because I think there's going to be real vulnerability. It's clear there is a hunger for new. I do think the key to Mom Donnie as he

was new Cuomo, was old, pure and simple. And those fifteen members of Congress who have allved so far have said they're going to run for reelection, whether it's a Maxine Waters in Los Angeles, Stenny Hoyer in Maryland, a Bill Pascrell in New Jersey, and Al Green in Texas, A Jerry Nadler in New York City, which may explain why he quickly jumped on the Mom Donnie bandwagon. He's seventy seven and has had to deal with his sheriff

primary pro Progressive primary challengers before. So that's the door that I expected. You know, this is what David Hogg had promised he wanted to do. And it is interesting when I look at the fifteen House members, none of them are in swing seats except for one that I can see here, Marcy Captor. Beyond that, everybody else is in fairly safe democratic seats. This could be This could

be the sea change. A sea change is coming. And I'll tell you one other one that might want to be careful here, and that is there is one senator who is up for reelection in twenty twenty six who is running that's over the age of seventy five, and

that's Ed Markey. Now, he survived a primary challenge when he was an appointed senator from from young Joe Kennedy, the third but Kennedy kind of ran to his right, ran a primary challenge from his right, which, as we all know, in a Democratic primary, that usually doesn't work. But that's another one. The point is is that I think, I don't think if you're an incumbent Democrat and you've been in office for more than a decade, watch out.

That's probably the number one message. Watch out quick update on the big beautiful bill that the president's trying to get through, and you have all these folks trying to sort of jam, if you will, The Senate's trying to jam the House. They still want to rush this vote. It's amazing how unpopular this bill continues to be. And there's been a couple of just sloppy comments that that I have a feeling are going to come back to haunt congressional Republicans. And that is one, of course, was

the one Joni Ernst made Everybody's going to die. And another is a comment that Mitch McConnell was quoted as saying on Medicaid cuts when he said, when he was quoted Tom Tillis, who is up for reelection, is concerned about the severity of some of these Medicaid cuts. Mitch McConnell, apparently in the same meeting said, yes, he's been hearing the same in Kentucky. But they'll get over it. I

just that phrase. They'll get over it. And we all know how whether one thing, it's one thing for Joni Earnst, somebody who outside of Iowa, most people don't know who she is. Mitch McConnell, that's somebody a lot of people have heard of. I just have a feeling that quote's going to become famous. The biggest problem Trump has, and I know he's promised to do a tour of the country to try to top this bill, is this bill starts out enormously unpopular. It has been so defined as

a cutting Medicaid bill. It is not on other stuff at all. It is it is. I don't know know how they turn this thing around as a political asset, but you know what this is what happened to Biden and the Democrats. They eventually got their bill passed, but it was such an ugly, painful process, so many ugly negotiations and various Democrats trashing different proposals, allowing quotes to be used in the elections to sort of make it

make Democrats uncomfortable trying to sell it. They had a you know, it was not a political asset in twenty twenty two, It just wasn't to the voters. I think

that's the situation that Republicans face with this bill in twenty twenty six. Look, not passing the bill would still be worse politics than passing this bill. But there's I don't know what they get to sell out of this that's positive. I really don't. It's becoming harder and harder. And speaking of which, and this May, it's an important poll number that I wanted to share with you that I just saw recently, and it's a CNN poll and it was just out. There's a there's a certain question

that we've tracked, we tracked at NBC for years. It's an important question. CNN had it on their poll on their on their most recent May twenty twenty five poll, and the question is simply this. It's a question we've tracked for generations and it's fascinating. The pattern here government is it doing too much? Or should government do more?

And the pattern is this, whenever Democrats and are in the White House, they're a majority of voters believe government is doing too much, And whenever Republicans are in the

White House, the number starts to increase the government that the government needs to do more. Well, we are at a near high fifty in CNN's polling, fifty eight percent saying that the government needs to do more. At the at the beginning of twenty twenty three, it was a fifty one forty nine. Now government does more versus government does too much is fifty eight forty one. And what's interesting here is nearly forty percent of Republicans believe that

government should actually do more, not less. Why am I singling that number out because in every previous pull that number has never been over thirty before, and it's over forty percent. This gets to the Josh Holly point, right, a Republican senator in Missouri who's worried about these Medicaid cuts because he knows the elect Donald Trump changed the

electorate right. The single most important political decision he made in order to become president of the United States was taking the idea of cutting Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid off the table. Now we're having a big argument, now what's a cut what isn't? And I think the country believes Medicaid is getting cut. And it certainly looks, you know, you look at it, they are making cuts to Medicaid.

Republicans are going to try to claim it is just simply cleaning up Medicaid, that there aren't cuts to actual beneficiaries. But it doesn't matter. Voters think government, no matter what government's doing, they should do more. So perhaps if your mom, Donnie, and you're offering to have government do even more, maybe this is a reminder that there's a fairly large constituency out there of people who think government should do more and not less. All right, I hope you enjoyed the

NBA Draft last night. This is my favorite stat for how crazy the NBA draft is. Of the final eighteen picks.

If you paid attention to the first round last night, only one of the final eighteen first round picks belonged to its original owner. That's how often and how many of these picks have been traded back and forth. The Boston Celtics at number twenty eight the only team, the only team after the top I think it was like seven or eight picks. Top ten would be top twelve picks, the only team to be an original owner of that pick. That all seventeen of the final eighteen picks in the

first round had been traded. I can't say the NBA isn't interesting. I think that's part of the NBA's problem. There are times where the off season or the stuff on Twitter is sometimes as exciting, if not more exciting, than sometimes they play itself. All right with that, I hope you enjoyed my conversation with my friend Read Wilson. We've worked together for years. He's an ex hotliner, but more importantly, he runs one of the smartest, most important

news organizations you might not have heard of yet. It's called Pluribus, tracks what's going on on the state level. More and more your life is being impacted by what state legislatures decide to do or not do. And in fact, one of the big parts of the conversation we have is about AI regulation, which of course Congress. Congressional Republicans are trying to protect big tech from any regulation in

the States for ten years. It is a part of the big beautiful bill that is extraordinarily controversial, and this could be the section two thirty piece of legislation. And Republicans do end up doing this that gets hung around their neck in a few years. If AI goes sideways on HI with that, let me sneaking a break and we'll bring on Read Wilson we joining me now is a long time friend of mine, colleague, an ex hotliner

and all of you know how I feel about X hotliners on this there is yes, I will always over index on X hotliners on the Chuck podcast. Read Wilson, a former editor in chief himself, got started there when I was there. He is now runs what I think is one of the must reads every morning for me.

It's called Pluribus and what it is is it covers what's happening in state legislatures, in state law, and as we all know, there is with so much inaction in the federal level of the government, with one of the weakest legislative branches in the history of the United States, and the sort of the self weakening that Congress has done. It is actually strengthened legislative chambers and legislative action all over the country because of the polarization and inability and

whatever you want to have it. And so in many ways, the laboratories of democracy is what we've always referred to as the states. Well, those labs are very busy these days. And whether it's on voting rights, whether it's on cooperation with the federal government, whether it's about medicaid funding, AI regulation. Reid Wilson knows all of these things these days. Plus you know he's a long suffering Seattle SuperSonics fan. We're going to you like that I went SuperSonics on you.

It's I had Leibovich on recently read and he came on the program wearing not a Seattle Sonics T shirt, SuperSonics T shirt. It was old school. It was green. It was that faded green yellow was kind of you could see the space needle and you know in the background you saw Shay, Oh, never mind, sorry, I look, we're I'll be honest, we're taping before game seven. This will air after Game seven. Do you care about the

thunder and all?

But it's allowed me to sort of I've gotten I've sort of reacquainted myself with the industry, gotten to know a lot of these key players. And is that a

an off the record conversation And I don't want to say where because I don't want to give away that part of it, but generally it was interesting. The essentially what the goal now is in these public funds debates about stadiums is don't go to the voters now right now? The voters are always it's easier to vote them down than vote for them. What's funny about these things is, like take Washington, DC is a great example. There was a lot of controversy about whether Nationals Park should be

done the way it was done. Twenty years later, everybody looks at what's been done to the waterfront to that area and says, oh my god, this has been transformational and so which is why it was they're going to get the Commanders deal done because they see what it has meant it really, you know, because sometimes you make these projects and they do not deliver on the extra

jobs and the extra this. But it does seem as if if you do it in a city, you know, you try to do it in a suburbs and you're not going to get the return on investment those promises, don't. I mean, it is rare. Maybe the Braves thing is an exception to the rule, but usually suburban developments don't work as well as actual city developments doing these things.

But what are you seeing as a trend and do you see more of these local governments going all right, we'll do this, but we cannot essentially make it a referendum with the voters.

seeing here is not that legislatures are doing are giving money to rich owners to build new stadiums. That's happened over time. They're building more than just stadiums though. They're building these entertainment districts own the stadium. To talk about DC en sure that that sort of Navy yard area has all built up.

those things right. And you know, when you go to a game, especially college football, and the extraordinarily lengthy TV timeouts that can sit you know, it isn't a great So you really have to do a lot of other You've got to make the experience big than just the two to three hours in the in the action itself.

So I think in many ways the franchises are incentivized to think bigger and then actually that does create payoff for the for the for the local government, because when you think bigger, then you do get hotel taxes, you do get the tourist stuff, you do get just basic sales tax and property tax return, where if it's just the stadium, you don't see any kind of return. Ask Maryland what kind of return they got from from ral John? Right, Yeah, you know, which is no longer roll John whatever that,

you know. But but you know, in Landover with that stadium, they didn't get the return they expected because Landover wasn't a destination, pure and simple.

a lot of states are dealing with right now is housing.

a little skeptical. Why are you always going to borrow? Why do you always want to borrow? Can you can you do this another way? You know? Type of mindset. I'm probably not alone in that, which is why all of these things are always what fifty one forty nine and usually in the negative, right, And.

to me how members of Congress are now realizing they read the fine print of the big, beautiful bill, which you know, I went on and ran on this. I'm not asking every member of Congress read every bill, but can you read the one big one every year that you got to vote on, Right, Like when you were in college, you knew which books you didn't have to read, but there was always one you had to read, right, Yeah, at.

it was amazing how they did get it into part one of that legislation. Now I think it's definitely going away, don't you.

and discrimination. UH. It's it's been a huge conversation in the states and they want to keep that power.

Who's the you know, is there any entity pushing back

against big tech on their aggressive AI? Is there another industry stepping into sort of to try to slow down AI's ability to basically get governments to do whatever the hell they want now?

And from sixty thousand feet that's what looks like. And then when you look closer you see a place like Texas right where the Texas House is actually split into three right, it's a three party apparatus these days, and there's sort of coalitions working themselves out and you see these Is there more bipartisanship on the state level than

on the federal level or am I just being pollyanniship? No?

largely because you know, I think the people who are most effective are the ones who understand the rules. That's sort of my guiding prints of politics. The people who get the rules are the ones who actually get stuff done.

and that that is the bipartisan trend between the you know, the Connecticut version of Bill and the Colorado version of Texas version has been to limit algorithmic discrimination. So if you're you know, seeking housing or or a medical care or something like that, a lot of states are passing rules that say that AI cannot deny you.

a product versus the other way around. Right, We've just this is unfortunately the mindset. So, I mean enforcement seems to me the part of this that I don't that isn't obvious to.

an agency itself or with the with the attorney generals.

of states are looking for that workforce. Who in the workforce that's going to understand the AI of the future, because there are a lot of things that that AI could streamline, a driver's license renewals, or just the basic government functions of the sort of lower level of intro employee new employee that could be made more efficient, so long as you have the workforce there that understands how

to create those efficiencies. And I think that's where that's where we're seeing a bit of a problem in state workforces.

coming in to take those jobs.

anything they want in order to experiment with power or or is it is there is there some pushback?

good news for GW, but it is interesting. It's funny you brought this up because I've learned this that you know, Louden was very open to this until they weren't. Right all of a sudden, now Louden residents are fighting this and there are others that don't want Suddenly there's a

pushback against these data centers.

you know, whatever neighborhood if you live, you know, suburban neighborhoods have these fights. This is county level stuff. But then states are trying to deal with it. We we know California is you know, how do you? San Jose has these where you can take your backyard garage and turn it into an apartment, standalonepartment. I think they are actually going to sell these things, of these little micro properties. I think they call them ad us.

So yeah, this becomes a huge nimbi issue, right Uh, where the locals don't want new housing coming in because it I don't know, devalues their housing, their housing market or whatever.

about it. But that doesn't mean people don't go to their congressmen and complain about local things. Right, You're like, come on, like, we've got a problem here. You know, I don't know if it's necessarily something the FEDS can deal with, as much as this really is a state

local issue. The other one is the privatization of the public school system, which seems to be certainly that is probably a partisan that obviously is falling along partisan lines. But you know, the destruction of the public school system in Miami has just been just heartbreaking for me and a lot of people. And it's all over Florida's got

huge gaps here. Texas is about to go on this and they've already had a very antiquated public school where basically you and I could say, hey, we're starting a school district, not just the school, you know, not just homeschool. You can start your own school district in Texas and then suddenly collect public tax dollars and that you may or may not have to account for. So obviously I have strong feelings about this because I just think we have problems in our public school system. This is not

the way to address it. That's my frustration with this. But is a is in these conservative legislatures? Is this just a I mean, it's just an avalanche that's coming and the privatization of our public education system is only increasing.

just California and Texas.

hundred thousand dollars total. Then the pool begins to expand, and you expand it to people who make up to two hundred thousand, are up to five hundred thousand, and then everybody who you know had disabled students or special needs students are included too. And then we go universe. And that's the that's the latest thing that we've seen here is a number of states expanding that eligibility pool to all kids in their state, places like New Hampshire, Iowa, Arkansas just did it.

centers here, when you go to that universal eligibility like Iowa did, the amount of money that that costs the public school systems explodes. We're talking, I mean, you know, fifty sixty seventy million dollars over what states had budgeted in small states like Iowa and Arkansas, so legislators are having to go back to the well, spend more money on these on these.

So schools themselves are raising tuition to capture as much as that of that money as possible, which again no it's.

how this is. You know, when you keep abandoning these schools, where in rural America? Are we building more schools in rural America to create school choice?

You're getting and some of them are good, and some of them are are crooked. And what I've not What I've also noticed is that there doesn't seem to be any good regulatory model to find out are these startup schools stealing tech expayer money or actually putting it to good use.

oversees it. There's multiple layers of of watchdogs on that money. And you know, as these voucher systems have been expanded, there's been very little expansion of oversight welso on how this money is being spent.

So I have no doubt. And and you know, we're we do everything by age. And I think now all the all the research indicates that learning, you know, that that is a you know, that is not always the best way to go, and that you need to have some of that flexibility.

that's the is there is there any legislature, Is there any leader in this space thinking about how to create this flexibility in the publics, in the public sector rather than just farming out tax to the private sector.

no one. You know, he knows that this is this is something that cuts across parties, party line. So it's a way that you could actually have a conversation with voters from different ideological stripes if you come at it from a hey, we know it's a problem. We need to we need to figure out a better way. I don't have the answer yet, but I know we got to tackle it. I actually think simply leaning in on that a little bit it's probably good politics right now.

because of the trend lines in different states. And I'm just sitting there going, God, does anybody think about history right?

to pay attention to these midterms.

talking up his Well I can say this because he posted it.

one race he cares about in Virginia. I think he's got the AG right, who's the only incumbent on the ballot, and that'll be the test, right, how strong are Spamberger's coattails? Does does the AG winner loose?

I mean, and we were seeing this, I mean New Jersey has that you know, there was a you know, it has it has that blue collar Democratic labor voter that's culturally a bit more conservative than the average Democratic candidate these days.

media market. It's all bleeding in. I always say I feel sorry for New Jersey's reputation because the only reason they have the reputation is sort of a scandal plague state is because the Philadelphia media market and the New York media market only covers New Jersey politics when there's something bad that happens. They never cover the day to

day stuff. They cover the day to day of their own states, but they never cover So the outsized coverage of the negative of New Jersey creates this negative vibe unfortunately for for I think New Jersey politicians, which you know, it's actually a fairly competent state government, you know, whether it was Christian charge, Murphy in charge, et cetera. But it does have this this reputation. Some of it is,

you know, an old reputation. Some of it is basically right, yeah, the party boss stuff that got rid of that, which is a you know, Andy Kim is never a US senator without it, you know, on that front. But there's definitely Jersey. Let me ask a few other states that I'm wondering if their legislatures have sort of pushed the envelope too much to give the other party a chance here. So do we see any green shoots for the Republicans

in Massachusetts this cycle? They're going to go to maga on there there are.

himself out of New Mexico. I know there was some chatter there where else was there chatter?

the musical greeting cards? Right? That was him. You know. Alabama is the one that I think Tommy Tupperville is just not a good political athlete. He may be a good football ex football coach, but he doesn't He steps in it quite a bit. And as you point out, voters take governor's racist more seriously by the person than by the party. If Doug Jones runs for governor, why do I think that's a competitive.

football coach applies to that. And you know, look, Tennessee is one of the more remarkable states if I you know, when I was first coming up professionally in politics, Tennessee, North Carolina, Georgia, when you said new South, it was Virginia, Tennessee, North Carolina, Georgia. Well, Virginia, North Carolina, Georgia definitely sort of is in one direction, but Tennessee didn't go in that direction now, and it's you know, it's it is.

You know, part of it was the strength of the Eastern Tennessee Republicans to sort of prevent too much democratic encroachment early on. But that's my only question. There is there a point where Nashville grows so much that Blackburn is seen is slightly too far to the right. I don't. I don't think so, but I'm just curious what you're seeing.

the Richmond suburbs exactly. And I'm up in Charlottesville and Northern and the and the Ampton Roads, and the same thing is happening in you know, around the fintech sector in Charlotte and Raleigh, uh and the tech sectors establishing a base in Atlanta.

they're all to the sun Belt sun Belt areas. You know that they're in Texas, They're in the Phoenix suburbs or something like that. And hey, look, you know Arizona has two Democratic senators. Now, North Carolina is always going to be competitive. Georgia has two Democratic senators for the moment, so you know, Texas, Texas should be on that list. But it's I feel like it's it's the Democratic version of Republicans New Jersey where it's always loosey in the football.

right and there's just nobody. There's nobody, there's you know, there is no None of these mayors in Texas and none of the mayors in Florida have become party leaders, you know what I mean. It becomes sort of that North Star, the way Bob Graham was able to and even Bill Nelson to a lesser extent, keep the state party competitive in a float, or the way you know, frankly, not since Lloyd Benson was there a Democrat that could be a magnet for money in the state party to

to have the to have the resources do that. And that's the same problem in New Jersey, right, there was no one Republican to invest in to get that part because it was just no other officeholders that they had there. Interesting take on Tennessee. I also think that Memphis is

just such a an ignored area by the state to try to redevelop, right And and ironically it's almost like there's a part of me that thinks the Republicans in Nashville are afraid that they don't want to create a second Nashville. Yeah, yeah, right, and Memphis.

George Bush? I remember my cousin one time left the country for six months and he goes, I flew out of National change planes in Houston, and then I came back and I flew from Bush to Reagan. It was like both happened like within six months of each other.

It's about state governments getting you know, Hey, you want to be at our rest stop, you got to pay us.

do they call it this? And you might go read a plaque and oh, you might have educated yourself by accident. And we can remain very, very in favor of these things.

having worked for you, you know, all right, all right, are the Mariners ever going to make the playoffs?

is you fork and and so uh it's uh. The Mariners are a frustrating you guys. Have I love the players that go in and out of that franchise and you're like, what, why can't it all be put together? Jay Rod drives me crazy. He's he's always won for four. I have enough fantasy team. He's always won for four. You has ever three for four? You know, he's not an over for guy. But it's like I keep waiting for him to be a Kuna and he's not a Kuna. But he's all the Kunah talent.

read us. We'll tell me, you know, keep that funny news in there, keep the funny quotes things like that.

something else. I mean, the fact that Tulsa or Oklahoma City will get punished. I mean, to me, those laws are unconstitutional because there's any I think it violates equal protection. But it is interesting how fearful these red states are of their urban centers creating referendum that they don't like.

Give me a little go tigers with the eaux. Is there a real path for a Democrat to win the US Senate seed in Louisiana in twenty twenty six with multiple Republicans lining up to primary Bill Cassidy, who's still

unpopular with many in the GOP for voting to impeach Trump. Could a bruising primary create an opening if John Bell Edwards runs and goes unchallenged in the Democratic primary, could enough Trump voter sit out or even back edwards tipping

the race? Should Republicans be nervous? Thank you? So? In the old rules of how the elections worked in Louisiana, which wasn't that long ago, right, you know where there would be a runoff if no candidate got fifty regardless of party, in the top two would meet in a December runoff. One of the first I remember the first in twenty oh two mary Landrew ended up in a runoff and pulled out the runoff sort of. It was a surprise in twenty oh two, and it was a

December race down there. It happened again. I believe in God. I want to say, you know, a they since you know part of the change in how they do they everybody used to be on the same ballot, even for federal elections. They I guess separated out federal elections. John Bell Edwards became governor because of the ability of having

all those Republicans on the ballot. Then he finished in the top two, and it was somebody who was too far out of the mainstream on the right, and John Bell Edwards was able to win not one but two terms that way. Look, if a Democrat is going to win in Louisiana again, it's going to be John Bell Edwards.

He'd probably be the only one. I would I would think it would have a chance, and it would have to be under a circumstance where it was somebody that was closer to that was probably further to the right than even the governor is further to the right than Scalise. I think you'd have to have a sort of a very sort of what I'd call it an undisciplined maga Republican because one of the things in Senate races, you know,

is people really do vote their jersey color. That the more voters know now that these these are proxy votes for the Supreme Court, right, that who you support here, that you know what their vote for a Supreme Court justice is going to be, and you're just starting to see it, right, Larry Hogan couldn't win it. He was very popular in Maryland, a popular governor as a Republican, but he wasn't going to win a Senate seat, and

it wasn't even that close. It was competitive ISHU for because he was a respected office a former office holder, but he wasn't going to win. And I kind of feel the same way about John Bell Edwards. In fact, I you know, I actually think he'd have an even money odds if he ran for governor. Again, I still think it's an uphill battle, not out of the question, and certainly I think Chuck Schumer and some other Democrats are trying to see if they can convince John Bell

Edwards to go on the ballot. I know what I would do if I were him, if I really wanted to be a Senator, I wouldn't run as a Democrat. I'd run as an independent. And I just sort of say, look, I'm I probably you know type of thing. I probably will caucus with them, but I you know, I don't know if I'm you know, I'm going to be more independent on a lot of these issues. You know, Look, he couldn't get elected if he wasn't going to be

in favor of the oil and gas industry. Right, Probably hard to be a member of the Democratic Caucus if you're going to do that. Look, how uncomfortable Joe Manchin was being somebody that was arguing four cole in a Democratic party that was shifting away on that issue in particular. So I'm more skeptical about a Democrat being able to win in a deep red state like that. I mean, look at Alabama.

media literacy. Most people don't really understand what journalism is, how sourcing works, what off the record means, or the ethics behind reporting, and that makes it easy for them to dismiss things as quote fake news. You said, journalists are also educators, so why don't more of them explain how how their work actually gets done. If trusted media needs to be rebuilt, shouldn't part of the back pulling back the curtain. Yes, I think. I hope you've noticed

quite a few people on substack do this. In fact, even I've noticed the Washington Post does a better job than most news organizations explaining I a source decided to be anonymous. The Wall Street Journal is starting to do that, you know, explaining why they allowed anonymity with that source in order to speak freely or fear of retribution. I think that that's important, right if you see somebody decided

to be anonymous due to fear of retribution. There's an interesting idea that the Washington Post announced today that they're going to let if on the record sources quotes. You know, if you've been quoted in a story and you think I think if you you know, if you don't think it was in context, they're giving you an opportunity to issue a correction it appears, or some form of that. I just think it's a you know, anything you can

do to you know. Look, I always thought it was important to always correct a mistake because I think you gain more credibility if people know. Hey, when you make a mistake, you let people know you've made a mistake. On that front versus trying to minimize. I mean, I used to get into real fight.

type of don't give him. You know, if you admit you made a mistake, my god, We're all human beings. You're gonna make mistakes, you know.

on the right hand corner. I am somebody who believes if you should correct them, correct the era error sort of with the same general audience size that saw the error. Right, So, if you make the mistake in your lead story on the NBA on a broadcast, make the correction on the lead story of the broadcast, maybe it's the next day or whatever it is, don't bury it at the end of that. So, look, I totally agree with the premise.

I actually think a lot of journalists are trying to find more ways to be explanatory in how they do their reporting, and I think the more we do that, the better. Last question before I let you go, I know you know, I don't want to simmons it. I don't want to do a Bill Simmons and give you

a two hour plus podcast. But if you want to our podcast, let me know after mom, Donnie was when in New York City could an outsider like Governor Andy Basheer, with his relentless focus on economic populism, be a model for candidates to bridge the divide between the establishment and progressives. Thanks Josh B. Well, look, I am very right now.

If I were to buy stock in any potential twenty twenty eight er. He's somebody stock i'd be buying right now. In Basher, You're I'm going. I have now spoken recently with two people running for governor in swing states. One was Michigan, the other was Florida. These are Democrats, and I asked them, you know who's a governor you want to you know you're going to lean on for advice. The first name both of them, now remember where they're running. One out of Florida, one out of Michigan. First name

out of their mouth, Andy Basheer. I think many, many of these sort of presidential hopefuls, you know, these governor candis who are trying to win in swing states or even in red leaning states or reddish states like Florida, look at and want to associate themselves more with Andy Basheer. The other governor you hear mentioned a lot would be a Joshapiro. What you're not hearing is Gavin Newsom. What

you're not hearing is JB. Pritzker. You're not hearing you know that occasionally you'll hear a Wes Moore every now and then. But the red state governor that may run for president Bashir has a lot of early buzz from some of these, particularly from candidates who are trying to send the message to independent voters that they're not a

base Democrat. So, but you're right, he is an economic populist, right, can he somehow be the the sort of a neutralized cultural issues right, Perhaps it's on guns, and you know, before when Roe v. Wade was Law of the land, any butser never could have gotten elected president because he was a self described pro life Democrat. Now when the story is not about whether abortion is legal, it's about

simply getting access. Well, he's on the pro access side, and as long as you're on the pro access side, you're going to be considered a Democrat in good standing. So I think he's I think he's got a unique way to potentially diffuse some cultural issues, very similar to a governor from a state that's quite close to Kentucky.

And in fact, the last time a Democrat carried the state of Kentucky there was a it was a gentleman named Bill Clinton was at the top of the ticket, and he, of course was at the time the sitting governor of Arkansas. So I'm you know, I think Bash's somebody out of buy stocking. I'd also buy stock in Wes Moore right now, I'd also buy stock in Alexandria

Cossio Cortez. So I'm not sitting here saying which wing or which part of the party will end up ascendant, but I think all three of them right now feel like safer plays of people that put it this way, you know, I definitely think there'll be top three type of candidates going forward. All Right, I'm gonna I'm gonna pause the conversation there. I will got a couple of great episodes coming for you. I think I previewed one coming up in the state of Florida. I think you

will enjoy that conversation. But with that, appreciate it, like subscribe, give me some good comments, leave some any questions you have, ask Chuck at dchucktodcast dot com, and until we upload again,