Politix

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm On Donald Trump’s hundredth day in office—the day we taped this podcast—he was historically unpopular, driving the country into recession, and responding to the loss of confidence in his administration by escalating his authoritarian threats against the public. In this special episode, Paul Krugman joins Brian to discuss:* What Trump has done to the U.S. economy in just the past 100 days.* Why it’s too late for him to fix some of the mistakes he made without subjecting Americans to real economic hardships in the coming weeks.* How his own faithless, erratic conduct will make recovery difficult (for the economy and his polling) even if he ends his trade war. Then, behind the paywall, how can future leaders attempt to undo the damage Trump has done? What will the country look like after 1300ish more days of this? Are economic forecasters underrating the risk of recession to hedge their bets? Would further inroads toward dictatorship deepen the economic crisis as well as the crisis of democracy and human rights? And what does it say about the direness of our circumstances that major upheaval, like impeachment and removal, would likely help restore global economic confidence in the U.S.All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Krugman asks, Did Peter Navarro save democracy? * Brian argues that though Trump is wreaking economic havoc, the rising against him isn’t class war as commonly understood on the left.* Matt argues hoping Trump implodes is not enough, and Democrats need a plan to actually win back the Senate.

Transcribed - Published: 30 April 2025

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm Right-wing religious fanatics want women to have more children with bread-winning men. Donald Trump views masculinity as synonymous with physical toughness. The synthesis: instead of using prosperity to make family formation more appealing, what if we just crushed female employment and made most jobs manual labor? In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* How Trump’s economic policy and disdain for white-collar professionalism might actually drive men into blue-collar work, and women into the kitchen.* Why this is a bad idea!* Whether Trump’s fear of backlash suggests Republicans will ultimately lack the courage of their convictions to stick with this attempted cultural revolution. Then, behind the paywall, what, if anything, can liberal elites do to make progressive politics and the Democratic Party more appealing to men—particularly men who like the idea of working hard and playing by the rules to get ahead, but don’t like Trump’s lying, misogyny, and authoritarianism? Can quietly competent Democrats like Chris Van Hollen out “man” testosterone-addled incompetents like Pete Hegseth? And is the solution to this gender-driven tension for men to spend less time online and more time socializing? All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian on how men can be manly without working in the mines at the behest of soft elites like Trump and Elon Musk. * Matt on the gender politics of Trumponomics.* Stephan Schubert.

Transcribed - Published: 23 April 2025

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm Two weeks into his trade war, Donald Trump has made at least a few tactical retreats, and markets have stabilized a bit as a result. Are we just in the eye of the storm? Or is it possible the economic fallout from the trade war won’t be as severe as we feared on LIBERATION DAY?In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* Why did markets recover significantly (though not entirely) from the big sell off after Trump launched the trade war?* Who has a better read on the harm Trump is likely to do to the United States and its economy, traders or Democrats?* Even in a least-bad case scenario, isn’t Trump setting himself up to absorb more economic blowback than Joe Biden did for presiding over a year of moderate inflation?Then, behind the paywall, how can Democrats hedge against the possibility that public opinion won’t do all their political work for them? Between Trump violating court orders, and Democrats facing greater threats of violence, how likely are we to lose democracy well before the midterm elections? What if anything can Democrats do to keep the rule of law intact enough to have a fair shot next November? What kinds of candidates should they recruit to maximize their odds of retaking power, even if the economy doesn’t collapse?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Matt on the trade-deficit myths driving Trump’s economic self-sabotage.* Brian on how House Democrats can exploit the rules to run down the clock and draw attention to the assault on democracy, and growing momentum for resistance.* Democrats plan a fact-finding trip to the CECOT gulag in El Salvador.

Transcribed - Published: 16 April 2025

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm Last week, in one fell swoop, Donald Trump wiped out trillions of dollars in wealth, upended all of our trade relations, and poised the U.S. for a lengthy recession and higher prices. His big money backers are in freakout mode. He’s made himself politically vulnerable in dramatic fashion, but also undermined the foundations of the American age.In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss life with (and after?) Trump’s tariffs:* How the fuck did Trump’s billionaire backers get this so catastrophically wrong?* Is Trump looking for an offramp, where he “negotiates” away these tariffs in exchange for symbolic victories, or are they here to stay?* How does uncertainty around that question exacerbate damage to the economy economic?Then, behind the paywall, where, if anywhere, do we go from here? Are Democrats handling the situation optimally, in both legislative and messaging contexts? Would it even matter all that much if Congress revoked presidential tariff authority, now that the whole world sees us as erratic and untrustworthy? Is there a path back to an American-led global economic order, or are we just permanently poorer?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian on what it would look like to really reverse America’s Trump-induced collapse.* Matt’s 29 thoughts on Liberation Day™️.* Josh Marshall on how all power is unitary.

Transcribed - Published: 9 April 2025

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm There are signs of life in the Democratic Party, and if Republicans continue to badly underperform in special elections, the vibes could shift. But there are some things even a robust opposition can’t really stop, when a president claims autocratic power, and is insulated from normal political considerationsAfter a brief discussion of Cory Booker’s filibuster, and the Supreme Court race in Wisconsin, Matt and Brian discuss the unitary executive theory. Specifically:* What is the unitary executive theory?* Is a rogue presidency really what Republicans had in mind when they concocted this theory a few decades ago?* Would adverse court rulings establishing an all-powerful, unaccountable executive mean the end of Fed independence, and a ruined economy?Then, behind the paywall, are there any legitimate reforms to our political system that would be both wise and make the government more responsive to election outcomes? Is there any circumstances under which this kind of king-like presidency would not devolve into criminality and corruption? Will any constitutional checks remain if the Supreme Court grants Trump’s unitary executive claims, or will it be entirely up to the masses?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* One way to weaken Trump’s executive would be to rescind his tariff authority.* The long tail of law firms caving to Trump’s lawless threats. * Pramila Jayapal’s Resistance Lab.

Transcribed - Published: 2 April 2025

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm Chuck Schumer and Senate Democrats continue to catch hell from their own voters for caving in the government shutdown fight. But in the coming days, perhaps sooner than most people are expecting, Congress will have to increase the debt limit. And once again, Democrats will have to decide whether and how to use their votes to rein in an out-of-control GOP.After some quick observations about the Trump administration’s snowballing Signal Scandal, Matt and Brian discuss and explain:* What happens, as far as we know, if the U.S. government runs out of borrowing authority;* Whether DOGE has made a default crisis more imminent by crippling the IRS (and, thus, revenue collection);* How Democratic leaders should seize control of this story now, and make their demands clear, before the deadline is at hand and Republicans beat them to the punch;* Why articulating their demands up front might help them avoid the trap of caving to Republican pressure.Then, behind the paywall, what should those demands be? It isn’t certain that Republicans will need Democratic votes to increase the debt limit. But if they do, should Democrats use their leverage to stave off the Republican threat to Medicaid? Or would they better off focusing on the issues like DOGE and Trump administration lawbreaking that were at issue in the aborted shutdown fight? All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* How the Trump administration texted Jeffrey Goldberg its war plans. * Brian’s 19 thoughts on the Signal scandal. * Donate to Susan Crawford. * Join the Tesla Takedown movement. * Elon Musk and the payment system.

Transcribed - Published: 26 March 2025

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm Donald Trump is becoming unpopular, but Democrats are more unpopular than they’ve ever been, reflecting not just Republican voter partisanship, but the fact that tens of millions of Democratic voters are fed up with their party’s conduct in the aftermath of the election. With partisan anger boiling over, calls for Chuck Schumer to resign from leadership, and constitutional crises on our doorstep, Matt and Brian discuss:* How did Democrats in Congress bungle the politics of funding the government so badly?* Will they have another bite at the apple when it’s time to raise the debt limit, or has the ship full of apples sailed?* Given mediocre Democratic congressional performance in 2024, and little prospect of winning the Senate in 2026 (absent a generational Trump-induced crisis) what’s the argument for Schumer to keep his job?Then, behind the paywall, a lot of yelling. Are Democrats playing too much protect-defense under dire circumstances? Should leaders like Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries be focused entirely on 2026 election politics, or are the moral stakes of Donald Trump’s authoritarian takeover threat severe enough to adopt a less cautious, feistier, more procedurally aggressive posture? Is the Politix synthesis of Yglesias-style policy moderation and Beutler-style procedural hardball the sweet spot for the party in the Trump era?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Matt’s sigh of relief that Schumer prevented the shutdown. * Brian argues that if Democrats aren’t going to pick big fights that might move public opinion, and leave everything to the courts, they should probably lay some political groundwork for whenever Trump decides he can ignore court rulings. * Donate to Susan Crawford. * Join the Tesla Takedown movement. * Proposition: “We're gonna get a lot of primary challengers with the issue positions of 2013 Barack Obama and a burning, unhinged desire to put Republicans in jail.” Would this be good or bad, and would it win or lose?

Transcribed - Published: 19 March 2025

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm By the time this episode runs, we’ll be two days from the deadline to fund the government. And if Republicans get there act together juuuust a bit, Democrats will have to decide if and how to wield their leverage to the end of forcing the Trump administration back into compliance with the rule of law.In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* Can Democrats hold out indefinitely, if Donald Trump refuses to faithfully execute the law, and win the politics of a government shutdown with the voting public?* Can they wield the filibuster power to at least strip the funding bill of special goodies House Republicans added to unify their members?* What would represent Democrats standing firm, and what would could as a betrayal of their constituents?Then, behind the paywall, does the rapidly deteriorating economy change the equation at all? Does it give Democrats leverage to align against a clean funding bill, given that Trump has only been able to damage the economy so badly because he’s abused his economic powers? And what can Democrats at the state level do, short of encouraging Tesla vandalism, to make Trump and Musk feel pain for their dereliction of duty?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian argues that Democrats need to be prepared not just to blame Trump for economic turbulence, but to prebut all the lies he’ll tell about it. * Matt says Democrats should learn from Trump’s economic failures, and re-embrace conventional economics. * “Tesla faces vandalism and protests amid backlash” 🎻.

Transcribed - Published: 12 March 2025

Just six weeks into his presidency, Donald Trump has dragged the country to the brink of recession. He’s become unpopular, lost the public’s trust to handle the economy, and hollowed out the government in risky ways. So in his first speech to Congress, Trump: blamed all of it on Joe Biden, subjected Democrats to a torrent of abuse, lied about Social Security (among many other things), and redoubled his commitment to tariffs, even if they cause “disturbance.”In this free post-address episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* Was this speech worse (that is, more dishonest, defamatory, etc.) than his first-term State of the Union addresses?* Does his dishonest and degrading style simply make him less popular, or is there a method to it?* What’s the endgame of seeding a bunch of lies about Social Security—a program he’s promised never to cut, and doesn’t have the votes to cut anyhow?* Would Democrats have served themselves better by boycotting the speech or having another party-wide plan to convey their contempt for and total lack of confidence in Trump?Plus: Elon Musk, Elissa Slotkin. William McKinleyTo our free subscribers: Thanks for listening. We hope you’ll stick around, and consider upgrading to a paid subscription. This is a public episode. If you'd like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politix.fm/subscribe

Transcribed - Published: 5 March 2025

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm Even in the acute phase of the COVID-19 pandemic, most Americans thought Donald Trump was a good steward of the economy. This misplaced faith has been key to his political durability. But after just one month of indiscriminately firing federal workers, illegally reneging on federal spending commitments, and making erratic threats to tariff the bejesus out of our trading partners, his economic approval has fallen under water. So what’s going on?In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* Are people really just annoyed that Trump has ignored the price of eggs and other staple goods?* Is it that by mistreating people and crippling important services, he’s created an unflattering news environment that has soured people on him generally?* Or might he have actually tipped the economy into recession at lightning speed?Then, behind the paywall, why does the explanation matter? Did Chuck Schumer and Hakeem Jeffries happen to land on exactly the right strategy to oppose Trump in his second term? If people are actually mad about the cruelty and lawlessness, does it suggest Democrats should shift their focus from egg trolling to forcing Trump back into regular order?And to that end, are Democrats prepared to force a confrontation over the rule of law as the deadline to fund the government approaches?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian on why losing popularity so quickly puts a big dent in Trump’s plan to become an autocrat. * Matt on how foreign leaders on the receiving end of Trump’s tariff’s threats can exploit this weakness by calling his bluff. * The perils of the Trump-GOP plan to cut Medicaid.

Transcribed - Published: 26 February 2025

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm Explaining the GOP’s rapid slide into authoritarianism is complicated, but you can’t tell the story if you don’t understand that Republicans have been unwilling to abandon huge, unpopular tax cuts for the rich as an organizing principle. In their view of things, if popular majorities don’t support regressive tax cuts, then democracy has to go. So it’s no surprise that last week House Republicans published its blueprint for special legislation that would cut taxes by many trillions of dollars, and partially make up the cost through enormous cuts to Medicaid. In this episode, Matt and Brian (who used the wrong mic like an asshole) discuss:* Why Democrats are so eager for Republicans to shift emphasis from attacking the civil service and the rule of law to advancing huge tax cuts for the rich.* Can Republicans, with their small Senate majority and tiny House majority, actually pass anything significant* Have they convinced themselves that there’s never a big political downside to cutting rich people’s taxes?Then, behind the paywall, why that assumption is more likely than usual to blow up in their face. How many people would lose their health insurance if Republicans cut $2 trillion from Medicaid? How dramatically would trillions of dollars in (mostly deficit-financed tax cuts increase inflation? If Republicans have doomed themselves no matter what (either they cause economic harm, or they abandon their legislative agenda), why don’t Democrats train more of their focus on the unfolding constitutional crisis, before Republicans succeed at wiping out constitutional government.All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Matt on the disconnect between Donald Trump’s aggressive power-grabbing and his party’s legislative incompetence.* Real-world consequences of the Trump-Musk assault on the work force are really bad. * The famous George H.W. Bush-Bill Clinton exchange on the real world impact of federal debt. * We’re rationing eggs now.

Transcribed - Published: 19 February 2025

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm Donald Trump and Elon Musk are now on the receiving end of multiple court orders requiring them to rein in their constitutional crime spree: resume impounded payments, destroy improperly downloaded government data, restore regular government communications. Their response, as of this recording, has been to see how contemptuous they can be of the orders, and musing openly about outright defiance.In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* What, specifically, precipitated this legitimation crisis?* If the Trump administration’s announces it will disregard district court orders, is it time to take to the streets?* Is Kendrick Lamar likelier to shatter the MAGA coalition than professional Democrats?Then, behind the paywall, how well, if at all, are Democrats responding to the prospect of a completely lawless presidency? Should they be more plainspoken about how they will use their power to restore the rule of law? If Trump will ignore district court orders enjoining his efforts to impound money, will he also ignore them if he tries to spend money absent a congressional appropriation?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Matt on why there are many, many better forms of resistance than doomscrolling.* Brian argues a crisis like this is the right time for Democrats to sideline over-cautious, elections-oriented consultants, and listen to people who know how to put down coup attempts. * Cass Sunstein on the high price of ignoring the social cost of carbon. (Trust us, it’s relevant.)

Transcribed - Published: 12 February 2025

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm Prior to the election, Elon Musk warned non-billionaire Americans to brace for “temporary hardship” (approving) in the event of a second Donald Trump presidency. Over the weekend, after insisting he’d impose 25 percent tariffs on all Canadian and Mexican imports, Trump also acknowledged (perhaps for the first time) that his economic policies will cause “pain.” By Monday, he’d backed down from the tariffs, but Musk is still on a rampage through the federal bureaucracy and Trump continues his efforts to purge the Justice Department and remake the government dictatorially.In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* Why did Trump (again) chicken out of his tariff threats?* Does it tell us anything meaningful about his real views, his political calculations, or what he may do in the future?* Why didn’t Trump exempt China, and what does that mean for the U.S. economy (and for Musk, who conducts tons of business in China)?Then, behind the paywall, a through line connecting Trump’s economic policy bluster with his very real effort to mount an authoritarian takeover. What are Trump, Musk, and his technogoons doing behind the scenes at the Treasury Department? Why are they also fixated on USAID? And how should Democrats, including nervous moderates, be prepared to respond?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian’s 18 thoughts on the omnicrisis, what Trump thinks he’s doing, and how to sort his volleys and outrages to focus on what matters most.* Matt makes the case that beleaguered civil servants shouldn’t quit their jobs. * What Musk’s techdork mafia appears to be doing at the Treasury Department.* Did Russians sneak a bug into the Oval Office during Trump’s first presidency?

Transcribed - Published: 5 February 2025

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm In just the past week, Donald Trump has illegally fired over a dozen federal anti-corruption watchdogs, installed Fox News weekend host Pete Hegseth as secretary of defense, and then claimed the power to arbitrarily withhold congressional appropriation—an unconstitutional maneuver called “impoundment.”In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* What are inspectors general, and why does Trump want to fire them?* How does his desire to avoid waste, fraud, and abuse oversight interact with his attempt to impound federal grant, loan, and aid spending?* What Democrats can do to try to force Trump and the GOP back into compliance with the law before it’s too late.Then, behind the paywall, are these just indiscriminate power grabs, or is there a method here? Why did Elon Musk, the country’s biggest defense contractor and political donor, take a special interest in getting a lightweight like Pete Hegseth confirmed as defense secretary, at a department that suddenly has no watchdog? Did the fact that Trump had limited success abusing and corrupting the civil service in his first term trick people into letting their guard down?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Matt on congressional Republicans’ war against the poor. * Brian on how Democrats can use their leverage to insist on compliance with the law and constitution.* Days after saluting just exactly like a Nazi would, Elon Musk tells German neo-Nazi party that Germans should get over their holocaust guilt.

Transcribed - Published: 29 January 2025

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm It’s the first Politix podcast of Donald Trump’s second presidency, and it began more or less how we expected: with a lot of bluster and bullshit, but also real demonstrations of lawlessness. Thanks John Roberts?In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* Trump’s immigration executive orders, with a special focus on his effort to unilaterally suspend the Constitution’s birthright citizenship guarantee;* Will Trump follow the law if and when this and other orders are enjoined by federal judges?* Why does birthright citizenship make the United States a better country?Then, behind the paywall, where does Trump’s appetite for lawlessness leave things going forward? Will there be any consequence for his day-one decision to pardon over 1,500 January 6 insurrectionists, even exceptionally violent ones? Will Democrats come to the defense of any affected immigrants, or will they remain divided (as they were through the GOP push to pass the Laken Riley Act)? And why did Biden fritter away the lame duck period instead of doing more to protect the country?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian argues House Democrats should move to impeach Donald Trump over the January 6 pardons, even knowing Republicans will rally to protect him. * Matt on the basic fact that because Trump is so self-serving and dishonest, nobody actually knows what he’s going to do. thinks Democrats can just follow Joe Manchin’s lead. * Greg Sargent on Trump’s executive order to declare illegal crossings an “invasion” and thus justify the deployment of troops to the southwestern border.

Transcribed - Published: 22 January 2025

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm It’s the final Politix podcast of Joe Biden’s presidency! Soon Donald Trump will be inaugurated president for a second, non-consecutive term. Inflation and crime and border crossings will fall, wages will rise, and America will be great again. Except…all those things already happened.In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* Why did the Biden presidency end in political failure, given the rosy macro picture?* What connectivity is there between the Biden administration’s conception of itself—and its ensuing approach to policy—and its unpopularity?* Would a younger president (even a younger version of Biden) operating under otherwise identical material circumstances have been able to spin the outputs of this administration into political gold?Then, behind the paywall, what if anything have Democrats taken from Biden’s struggles, and are they applying those lessons to their early opposition? Why are they poised to help Republicans pass the Laken Riley Act? Do they really think holding Trump to bad-faith campaign promises will hurt him when, e.g., the cost of eggs doesn’t go down? Or is it likelier that, with Trump claiming credit for Biden’s economy, voters will stop citing the cost of living as their top political concern?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian can’t pronounce Baudrillard, but he did write about how Democrats should rethink the idea that delivering good macroeconomic conditions is the key to winning elections, and rethink their political strategies from scratch. * Matt thinks Democrats can just follow Joe Manchin’s lead. * Dylan Matthews argues that Biden did himself in by refusing to make hard-nosed decisions.

Transcribed - Published: 15 January 2025

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm Multiple developments over the holiday break raise real questions about who will call the shots in Donald Trump’s still-forming administration. Elon Musk seemed to commandeer aspects of legislative strategy, immigration, and foreign policy. Republicans in Congress seemed to heed Musk over Trump, while leaving Trump wide berth to enrich himself and crack down on his enemies.In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* How Musk, an unelected immigrant oligarch, built so much sway over the GOP, and why he might be interested in Trump administration policy outside of DOGE and government contracts.* Is Musk too rich and influential for Republicans too control, or is Trump simply too diminished to head the government and his party simultaneously?* Whether a MAGA coalition comprising tech billionaires (who support certain categories of immigration) and grassroots nativists (who do not) can long endure. Then, behind the paywall, what will this mean when it’s time for Republicans to fund the government, increase the debt limit, or enact substantive. Will Republicans, with a historically tiny House margin, be able to pass any meaningful legislation at all? Do they feel they have leeway over the details of policy, so long as they let Trump’s corruption run rampant? What are the tail risks of a corrupt executive branch with no clear leader, checked only by a paralyzed Congress?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian on Trump, tech weirdos, and the GOP’s seemingly successful quest for cultural dominance.* Matt on the menace of Trump’s unapologetic political renaissance.* Norm Ornstein on the mess Trump is preparing to dump on Mike Johnson and the congressional GOP.

Transcribed - Published: 8 January 2025

The mailbag episode is here! Thanks to all who sent questions, and apologies to those who didn’t get answers. We hoped to get through more, but brevity isn’t our strong suit and we ran out of time. But the answers we DID deliver are choice, in our opinion.We touch on:* Ezra Klein’s terribly wrong ideas about the political impact of blue-state and blue-city misgovernance;* What Donald Trump’s attempt at an unconstitutional third term will look like IF he tries;* How Biden could go out with a bang, even without relying on presidential immunity (but probably won’t);* Matt’s candid thoughts about Pod Save America (as Brian demurs).This episode is free to all, a small token of gratitude to all of our subscribers this holiday season for making this podcast possible. We’ll do more of these in the coming year, and if you want your questions answered (or at least included in a lengthy Google document that we might not get through in the allotted time) you know what to do: Further reading:* Brian offers a new, important reason people should reset their relationships with social media. * Michelle Goldberg on this great capitulation.* Greg Sargent discusses the challenges of rebuilding in this climate with Ben and other DNC candidates, Ken Martin, and Martin O’Malley. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politix.fm/subscribe

Transcribed - Published: 24 December 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm The mailbag episode will have to wait, but for good reason! An opportunity arose for us to interview Wisconsin Democratic Party Chair (and DNC chair candidate) Ben Wikler. So we jumped on it—and warmly extend an invitation to other DNC chair candidates to join us in the new year.In this episode, Matt and Brian ask Ben:* What he thinks happened in the election, and whether the lessons are actionable for a DNC chairman;* What does the DNC and its chairman actually do;* How to tell a good, effective political operative from placeholders and check cashers;* If he’s prepared the dirty tricks and abuses of power that Donald Trump might direct at Democratic Party leaders, including him.Then, behind the paywall, a lengthy exploration of and primal scream about Nancy Pelosi’s decision to whip votes against Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, blocking her from becoming the top Democrat on the House Oversight Committee, in favor of 74-year old, cancer-stricken Gerry Connolly. Why would AOC have been a better opposition leader on this committee? What does the episode portend for Democratic infighting and grand strategery going forward? And most importantly, wtf was Pelosi thinking?!All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian argues that reprising the strategy that just lost Democrats the election (including sidelining more dynamic messengers) makes capitulating to Trump the path of least resistance for other people and institutions. * Michelle Goldberg on this great capitulation.* Greg Sargent discusses the challenges of rebuilding in this climate with Ben and other DNC candidates, Ken Martin, and Martin O’Malley.

Transcribed - Published: 18 December 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm Last week, a big public uproar forced the health-insurance carrier Anthem to backtrack on a plan to cut reimbursements for anesthesia. Then, an assassin—suspected to be a 26 year old ivy league graduate named Luigi Mangiano—murdered Brian Thompson, the CEO of United Healthcare.In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* Why there such widespread progressive interest in both of these stories;* How the progressive backlash against Anthem, driven by the American Society of Anesthesiologists, underscores just how thorny the politics of Medicare for all would be in practice;* Whether either of these developments would have played out differently under a better-conceived health-care finance system.Then, behind the paywall, why the differences between public and private health insurance really do matter, both in policy terms and as lightning rods for public anger. Would people left of center have been angry at Medicare for cutting payments to anesthesiologists? (Spoiler: Medicare already did this.) How badly do the profit and brand-management motives private insurers operate under warp patient care, relative to public payers like Medicare? Is it fair to be angrier at private health insurance companies than public providers for rationing services?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Lisa Beutler, from the archive, on the solidarity-based case for Medicare for all. * Matt Bruenig on why private health insurers actually are the worst bad guys in the health-care system, despite being middle men. * Noah Smith on why, actually, no, it’s the doctors and hospitals and such.

Transcribed - Published: 11 December 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm Donald Trump and Joe Biden marked the weekend after thanksgiving with two big news developments that look a lot like chess moves in a high-stakes match between the revenge-obsessed far right and the outgoing liberal establishment. First, Trump nominated Kash Patel, an aggrieved loyalist with a literal enemies list, to run the FBI. Second, Biden pardoned his son Hunter. In this episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* Who is Kash Patel and why is his “nomination” to a vacancy that doesn’t exist so chilling?* Does it justify a blanket pardon for Biden’s son, who really did engage in illegal activity, but who’s been the target of a years-long Republican harassment campaign?* Should Democrats in Congress, caught off guard by Biden’s move, challenge Republicans to reform the pardon power?Then, behind the paywall, what should Democrats do about nominees like Patel? Should Biden offer pardons to his full enemies list? Is strategic silence and working the inside game really the best way to guard against the corruption of the so-called “power ministries”? Should Democrats really concern themselves with insisting on the kinds of guardrails that protected Trump from the political consequences of his own corruption in his first term?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian’s 19 thoughts on the Hunter Biden pardon, and why there was a better option. * Josh Marshall on the merits the YOLO, DGAF Biden pardon.* An August Atlantic profile of Kash Patel.* Jane Mayer’s bombshell investigative report on Pete Hegseth’s secret history.

Transcribed - Published: 4 December 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm A blustery Donald Trump statement threatening large tariffs on Canadian and Mexican imports (plus increased tariffs on Chinese goods) raises the question of why the outgoing Biden administration, the lame-duck Congress, and the broader civil society have taken few proactive steps to create obstacles to coming Trump abuses.Matt and Brian discuss:* Is the opposition simply exhausted?* Do Democrats and Trump-wary Republicans in Congress simply think he’s full of shit?* Is it wiser to take a wait-and-see approach (will Pete Hegseth actually be confirmed? does Trump really intend to impose these tariffs?) than to push back before the damage is done?Then, behind the paywall, a more detailed discussion of how the administration is battening down the hatches ahead of Trump’s presidency, and what more should be done. Is it better to frustrate Trump’s ambitions than to let him sweep in and do toxic, politically damaging stuff? Can institutional memory be preserved, outside the administration if necessary, so Trump can’t do irrevocable damage to stuff the government does well? And what’s a better, holistically: honey or maple syrup? Opium or cocaine?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Matt on why Trump’s stunt-based form of “leadership” might not work out under current economic conditions. * Brian on why Democrats should start thinking now about how they’ll go about rebuilding, if and when they ever retake government. * Flashback to 2000, when the George W. Bush campaign discussed its plans to reject the election results if won the popular vote but lost the lost the Electoral College.

Transcribed - Published: 27 November 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian take stock of Matt Gaetz, Pete Hegseth, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., and Tulsi Gabbard—Trump’s Fanatic Four nominees to head the Departments of Justice, Defense, Health and Human Services, and the national intelligence directorate. They discuss:* Why Hegseth’s personal mediocrity (C-list Fox News host) and depraved sexual conduct (pretty awful), combined with the complexity of running an organization as vast as DOD, might make him the worst of the four picks. * But also why they’re all really bad and it’s hard to say who’s the worst!* How career civil servants should respond (or not) when confronted with corrupt or abusive orders.Then, behind the paywall, a longer discussion of why Trump has picked scandal-plagued individuals for these roles, and how Democrats in Congress can and should exploit their liabilities. Why are prominent Democrats like Cory Booker, Chris Coons, and Jared Polis setting the tone by kissing up to RFK Jr? Does Hakeem Jeffries really believe that Trump’s potential cabinet officials are distractions, not worth commenting on? Is the best we can “hope” for that these people shamble their way into crises that leave the administration discredited?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian responds to Jeffries: Cabinet secretaries are #actually kind of a big deal? * Matt thinks Trump’s best bet for success is to not elevate fanatics and crooks, and just chill.* So does Brian, FWIW.

Transcribed - Published: 20 November 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian review the incoming Trump administration as it takes shape, and what if anything Democrats can do, without official power or a real media arm, to limit the damage.* Who has Trump nominated already, and who is he being gun-shy about, given that some of his loyalists would have a hard time getting confirmed by the incoming Senate?* Can Democrats quickly shift gears into productive opposition, when so much of their infrastructure is built around intra-left discourse.* How could Democrats (or how would Brian) go about building and reforming media to reach marginal voters who don’t tune in to mainstream organs or sophisticated political media?Then, behind the paywall, Matt and Brian discuss the challenges progressive culture might pose to the establishment of a bigger tent, and more robust messaging. Would a new liberal media project tolerate elevating people who aren’t committed movement progressives? How can pro-liberal, pro-Democratic Party ideas better infiltrate non-political spheres of media, from pop culture to fitness to cooking? Given how much liberal funders already spend on “unhelpful” projects, is there any reason not to try?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian’s article pleading with Democrats to take their media deficit seriously, and do something about it.* Matt on how Democrats can broaden their own tent (ideally while their new media works at shrinking the GOP tent). *

Transcribed - Published: 13 November 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian discuss the unexpected final (?) twist of the 2024 campaign: The immense backlash to Donald Trump’s rally at Madison Square Garden.* Why did a bad comedian’s offensive comments about Puerto Rico break through, when he and other speakers made equally racist comments about black people, Jews, Palestinians, and others?* After a campaign in which Democrats largely downplayed race politics in favor of cross-cutting democracy, abortion, and health care appeals, how did racism become the disqualifying thing that broke through the MAGA din?* Are Democrats like Pete Buttigieg right that the Madison Square Garden controversy is “bait,” and a distraction from those other issues, when it’s visibly tearing Republicans apart, and they’re desperate to change the subject?Then, behind the paywall, Matt and Brian take a comprehensive look at the immense, organic backlash to Jeff Bezos and the Washington Post after Bezos scuttled the paper’s endorsement of Kamala Harris to preemptively appease Donald Trump. To what extent was this a canary in the coal mine of for the country’s drift into authoritarianism? Is the boycott itself a leading indicator that the anti-Trump resistance is a sleeping giant awakened? Will campaign reporters push back against Bezos-style thinking by closing out the election with the kind of adversarial coverage that Trump deserved all along. All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Matt’s 27 takes on the election, one week out. * Brian on the awakening of America’s pro-democracy majority. * Kamala Harris, For Men! by Sarah Lazarus.* Jeff Bezos “explains” himself.* Michelle Obama’s plea to male voters.

Transcribed - Published: 30 October 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian discuss the merits and drawbacks of field organizing, and why it’s worth knocking on doors or making calls if you care about the outcome of the election. They tackle questions including:* Can feel your own contribution to turnout, even if canvassing operations are expensive for the campaign? (Spoiler: Yes.)* Where to volunteer depending on your demographic traits.* How talking to real, marginal voters who don’t live and breathe politics will humble even the most self-assured ideologue.Then, behind the paywall, Matt and Brian muse about what they hope and expect to see from the campaigns in the closing days of election. Will Donald Trump fill more news holes with Arnold Palmer’s fleshy hog (to avoid more discourse about January 6 and his dictatorial ambitions)? What can Kamala Harris do to keep national attention where it belongs? How can everyone from lowly issue advocates to retired four-star generals do to make sure the campaign ends on a helpful note?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian’s reflections on his first canvassing experience. * Matt on why Democrats should talk about their good issues.* A right-leaning think tank concludes Trump’s fiscal agenda will dramatically hasten Social Security insolvency and the severity of the automatic benefit cuts seniors will experience if we reach that point.

Transcribed - Published: 23 October 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian examine the quadrennial liberal October panic, and think through practical ways for Democrats to close strong:* Is it possible to increase the salience of Democrats’ top issues (abortion, democracy, and health care) when Trump is hoovering up attention to his fascist freakshow?* Might the fascist freakshow, for perverse reasons, be helping Trump keep the race close?* To what extent should working the media refs to focus on Trump outrages fit into the plan?SPOILERS: Matt answers those questions: Yes, maybe, and very little. Brian answers them: Maybe, no, quite a bit.Then, behind the paywall, a granular look at why Democrats shouldn’t fear racial depolarization. Have Democrats (wrongly) convinced themselves that they can’t increase their share of the white vote? Does it matter if homing in on issues like abortion and anti-fascism makes the Democratic coalition a little less rainbow? Are these issues resonant enough to deliver Kamala Harris a victory if Trump and his corrupt allies stage a rat fuck late in October?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* The Our Brand Is Crisis documentary. * Brian on Barack Obama doing asking the Joseph Welch question of our generation.* Matt on how Harris can, should, and does appeal to Trump-curious male voters.

Transcribed - Published: 16 October 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian take a big-picture view of Republicans for Kamala, including:* Why the Emerging Democratic Majority thesis of the aughts and early 2010s made people assume that outreach to Republicans would lead to betrayal on policy grounds.* The academic basis for Harris to view support from influential conservatives as a critical safeguard against Democratic backsliding.* How a more concerted Trump-accountability effort at the outset of Joe Biden’s presidency might have mooted the whole need for a unified front.Then, behind the paywall, a more nuts-and-bolts look at how this kind of third-party validation works in practice: Are Harris’s critics really mystified by why Democrats keep citing state-level Republican praise for the Biden administration’s response to Hurricane Helene? Would we be talking about January 6 so much, all of a sudden, were it not for the fact that it drove so many influential Republicans into the anti-Trump camp? If this kind of thing is suspicious, or of dubious value, why is Trump trying so hard to pretend Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., Tulsi Gabbard, and Elon Musk reflect significant Democratic defections?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* How Democracies Die, by Steven Levitsky and Daniel Ziblatt* Brian on creeping Democratic fatalism and the role Republicans for Kamala might—might—be playing in it.* Matt on how Harris can, should, and does appeal to Trump-curious male voters.

Transcribed - Published: 9 October 2024

JD Vance is the more polished debater. And whether it was because he was jittery or prepped not to take a wrecking ball to anyone except Donald Trump, Tim Walz wasn’t generally able to convey that Vance is much more extreme than he pretended to be on stage Tuesday night. So how did he win?In this free post-VP debate episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* Whether Vance’s polish is really more appealing to a general audience than Walz’s plain-spoken delivery. * Was Vance able to simultaneously rehabilitate his tattered image, focus on attacking Harris instead of Walz, and kiss up to Donald Trump?* Most importantly, will Walz’s best moment—cornering Vance who was unwilling to admit that Trump lost the 2020 election—be the defining moment of the debate that establishes Walz as the clear winner.* Also, what about the moderators?If you’re new to Politix, welcome! We hope you’ll continue to listen, and consider upgrading to a paid subscription. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politix.fm/subscribe

Transcribed - Published: 2 October 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian take stock of Donald Trump’s late pitch to young male voters, who are significantly more Republican curious than young men were in the Bush and Obama years:* Are young men really drifting in a more conservative direction? Or are they mostly attracted to Trump’s teflon libertinism?* Is America swinging back to a pre-Bush norm when partisanship wasn’t so stratified by age?* Will these voters turn out? Are they even registered? Then, behind the paywall, Matt and Brian debate the theoretical merits of pandering to young voters with policy appeals. Are Trump’s weird promises around vaping and cryptocurrency really the kind of thing that can mobilize voters without partisan commitments or apolitical young people? Does the fact that he fully reversed himself, in exchange for money, to adopt these new positions undermine the appeal at all? And to what extent is the Harris campaign also microtargeting young voters?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian on the deficiencies of Trump’s pandering, young-male voter Hail Mary. * Matt on whether the influx of women into the workforce (and, in parallel, the Democratic Party) help explain new norms around sensitivity (or young men’s new openness to MAGA). * Jessica Valenti on how Kamala Harris doesn’t just defend abortion but has started to normalize it.* The Harvard Institute of Politics fall youth poll.

Transcribed - Published: 25 September 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian take stock of the many ways Republicans have flailed since Donald Trump lost last week’s debate against Kamala Harris:* If they’re trying to change the topic, or convince people Trump won, why are so many MAGA influencers still trying to “prove” ABC rigged the debate for Harris?* Is the discourse they’ve provoked by terrorizing Haitians in Springfield, OH, actually better for Trump than some stories about how he lost?* Where does Trump’s, um, weird relationship with the bigoted conspiracy-theorist Laura Loomer fit into all this?Then, behind the paywall, Matt and Brian debate the nature of racist political demagoguery when the progenitor is as erratic and undisciplined as Donald Trump. Are Democrats too traumatized by the Trumpian immigration politics to recognize when Trump veers into politically toxic territory? Is it a political emergency when Trump manages to drag discourse back to immigration? Even when he does so by saying outrageous and unpopular things? Should Democrats be more chill, pressing their advantages on whatever issue happens to be in the news—or should they always anxiously try to steer the conversation back to safer terrain?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Matt on Karl Lueger, George Wallace, Donald Trump and the tired dance of the demagogue. * Brian on how Democrats can compete with this Trumpian incitement machine instead of running a conventional campaign and getting drowned out. * The James Fallows and Deborah Fallows Our Towns foundation, book, and documentary.

Transcribed - Published: 18 September 2024

That was way better than the first one! In what may be their only debate Kamala Harris reduced Donald Trump to a smoldering mass of anger, deranged lies, and incoherent rambling. It’s fair to say everyone agrees she won, because pro-Trump influencers are already attacking the moderators.In this free post-debate episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* How Harris pivoted away from Biden’s failed debate strategy toward one designed successfully to provoke Trump into making big mistakes. * Why her polls slipped a couple points between the Democratic convention and the debate.* What a longer run strategy to rebuild and maintain her pre-convention lead might look like.* Will she get a measurable bump from her debate victory on Tuesday? And, if so, how long will it last?If you’re new to Politix, welcome! We hope you’ll continue to listen, and consider upgrading to a paid subscription. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politix.fm/subscribe

Transcribed - Published: 11 September 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Brian takes a much needed vacation and Matt is joined by The Atlantic’s Jerusalem Demsas to talk about housing and the 2024 campaign. * Barack Obama’s striking and unexpected embrace of the YIMBY diagnosis of the housing issue at the Democratic National Convention. * Kamala Harris’ more equivocal embrace of the same formula along with some other …

Transcribed - Published: 4 September 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian look back at what went right at last week’s Democratic National Convention, how it maps on to the lead Harris built in her first month on the campaign trail, and what it augurs for the fall campaign:* How exactly did Harris build a lead so quickly?* Is maintaining or growing it really as simple as “keep on doing what you’re doing?” Is that even possible given how the dynamics of the race will change in the home stretch?* What does peak performance look like, if not this?Then, behind the paywall, Matt and Brian break down why her acceptance speech was such a big hit across the party. How did she manage to convince centrists and progressives alike that the speech reflected their values? Is she demonstrating the same kinds of political finesse that made Barack Obama such a successful candidate? Or are people mostly just excited to rally behind someone who seems to know how to beat Trump? Plus a granular look at why the polls are probably pretty close to the mark—meaning Harris has a better than even chance of winning, but the election will likely be close, as in 2020 and (gulp) 2016.All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian on Democrats balancing confidence with non-complacency. * Matt on how Harris can ride happy warrior anti-Trump vibes to victory.* Joe Lieberman (???) had a pretty good acceptance speech, too?

Transcribed - Published: 28 August 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Semafor’s Dave Weigel joins Matt and Brian from Chicago to assess the Dem convention in Chicago:* Is DNC’s treatment of credentialed journalists another sign that Democrats are consciously decoupling from the mainstream media?* Are there any politically meaningful differences between how the convention is playing out on national television and how people are experiencing it in person?* Can Harris get a polling bump out of the festivities, above and beyond the spike her post-launch campaign blitz generated? Then, behind the paywall, Matt and Brian pick up where they left off last week in their debate over whether Harris has improved economic sentiment simply by restoring optimism to the anti-Trump coalition. What does the data suggest? Will she come to regret her policy rollout if it turns out public opinion about the economy is already on the mend? Can she appeal to skeptical voters without staking out views on issues like price controls or deficit reduction that could prove to be unnecessary?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian argues the Harris campaign is purpose built to reassmble the national anti-Trump majority. * Matt argues this approach is too complacent.* Dave on how Harris has driven third-party polling into the ground.

Transcribed - Published: 21 August 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian survey the news periphery for various black swans and Chekhov’s guns that might change the trajectory of the race. They discuss:* How Kamala Harris’s joy-themed campaign might affect economic sentiment, and whether the economy itself is at risk of contraction;* Donald Trump’s coverup of a $10 million bribe (or attempted bribe) dangled during the 2016 campaign by the Egyptian government;* The campaign press corps’ increasing impatience with Harris over press access. Then, behind the paywall, a deep dive into the apparent hack and theft of Trump campaign emails, and why the news outlets that have obtained them have so far not published any stories about their contents. Is the political media establishing a new set of rules meant to benefit Donald Trump? Will these emails eventually appear online, unfiltered, just as Clinton campaign emails did eight years ago? Can mainstream outlets quietly decide to show restraint over Trump emails, without bothering to explain to the public why their standards changed and what they got wrong in 2016?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian on what the New York Times and other outlets that drove the EMAILS frenzy in 2016 owe their readers now. * Matt on whether Harris should talk to the press, and how the press can do a better job with their access.* Brian on why Joe Biden should declassify the government’s Trump files.

Transcribed - Published: 14 August 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian offer near-instant reaction to the news that Kamala Harris has nominated Minnesota Governor Tim Walz for the vice presidency. They discuss:* The pros and cons of this decision;* The factors that likely persuaded Harris to select Walz rather than a swing-state or red-state governor;* How adding Walz to the ticket might shape the race and the future of the Democratic Party.Then, behind the paywall, Politix looks at the veepstakes in a wider context of developments that might shape affect the outcome of the election. Will anything about this decision really matter if economic headwinds weaken the U.S. economy over the next three months? Is it more or less significant to domestic politics than a potential regional conflict in the Middle East? If it’s ultimately insignificant to politics, why did people factionalize around various vice-presidential contenders? All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian’s 24 thoughts on the Harris veepstakes. * Matt on the politics of weirdness.* Walz’s interview with Ezra Klein.

Transcribed - Published: 7 August 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian delve into the new discourse, ignited by vice-presidential shortlister Tim Walz, about the inherent weirdness of MAGA leaders. * What do Democrats mean when they say Republicans like Donald Trump and JD Vance are “weird”? * How normal are Democrats, actually? * Having drawn this line, can Democrats now concede anything to “weird” Republicans as they appeal to swing voters?Then, behind the paywall, a wide-ranging discussion about whether this salvo, which has put Republicans back on their heels, entitles Walz to special consideration as Kamala Harris considers her running mate. Would Walz’s gruff, non-nonsense vibe more effectively balance the ticket than other, more moderate contenders? Does he offer lasting coalition unity, or just a bandaid on factional rifts that are bound to burst back open? Do data-rooted, Pennsylvania-centric considerations dwarf hazier ideas about which ticket makes the best avatar for the Democratic Party?All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Greg Sargent on how the politics of immigration don’t all work to Republicans’ advantage. * Brian on the downward (and likely very weird) spiral Republicans will enter if Harris claims a meaningful lead. * Matt on how Harris can and should position herself as more moderate than Biden.

Transcribed - Published: 31 July 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian discuss the Democrats brand new presumptive presidential nominee, Kamala Harris, and how she might end up on top after the dust from this shakeup settles. * What can and should Harris do to broaden her appeal relative to Joe Biden, given that she’s both inheriting his campaign and is viewed to be more left wing than he is.* Can she maintain renewed youth and non-white voter enthusiasm and disarm skeptical swing voters simultaneously?* Are Democrats ready for coming Republican attacks on Harris—the ones that might actually do some damage?Then, a whole lot more behind the paywall. Is the lesson of Hillary Clinton and now Joe Biden that the Republican smear machine has grown so big and unchallenged that it can make any leading Democrat politically unviable in a short amount of time? What kinds of structural changes to the progressive firmament might help Democrats weather these attacks and land agenda-setting attacks of their own? How can any Democrat succeed in this environment if Democrats do’t change anything? All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian wonders whether we’ve entered a new period where Democrats will have to get used to their presidents serving a single term, during which they'll be cannon fodder in right-wing dominated media. * Matt’s 17 thoughts on the newly transformed race. * Ron Brownstein on whether Harris’s coalition will look more like Biden’s, Barack Obama’s, or somewhere in between.

Transcribed - Published: 24 July 2024

After weeks of internal recriminations over the Democratic Party’s crisis of confidence in Joe Biden’s ability to mount a winning campaign against Donald Trump Biden announced that he will not accept the Democratic nomination for president. In short order, he announced his endorsement of Kamala Harris, making her the runaway favorite to top the Democratic ticket. In this emergency episode, Brian and Matt discuss:* Whether a contested convention would do more harm than good, even if it resulted in the nomination of a more popular ticket.* Why progressive stalwarts like Bernie Sanders and AOC stuck by Biden to the end.* Who would make the Harris’s best running mate?* How Harris should parry against inevitable sexist and racist attacks from the right. It’s a brand new election! This episode is free to all, but if you’re interested in our follow on coverage and in accessing our full archive, we hope you’ll consider upgrading your subscription. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politix.fm/subscribe

Transcribed - Published: 21 July 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian assess a shocking week in politics. * Are we really going to move on from the Trump shooting attempt if it turns out, as seems possible, that the shooter was an accelerationist right-wing fanatic? * Will Democratic leaders use the attempted shooting as an offramp from their efforts to find a stronger presidential candidate?* Does Nancy Pelosi still have the clout and skill to help get Joe Biden to think beyond his ego?Then, behind the paywall—a whole bunch more. Does Pelosi’s emergence as the leader of the Dems’ replace-Biden effort make Brian reconsider his long misgivings about Pelosi’s leadership? Does Biden’s political failures make Matt reconsider his assessment of Biden’s political instinct and the wisdom of the centrist establishment? How was the public more clear eyed about Joe Biden’s limitations than liberal elites? Also, what’s the significance of JD Vance’s rise and potential vice presidency? All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Pelosi lieutenant Adam Schiff: “I think if [Biden] is our nominee, I think we lose. And we may very, very well lose the Senate and lose our chance to take back the House.”* Brian takes stock, after three disorienting week, of the bleak new political landscape.* Matt on how we (including Joe Biden and current Democratic leaders) have more agency to shape future events than we’re comfortable with.

Transcribed - Published: 17 July 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian assess the downward spiral of the Biden campaign and look for signs that Democrats won’t just give up on the race. * Has Biden really ruled out suspending his campaign, or is he just being pragmatic: 100 percent in until he’s 100 percent out?* Are the influential Democrats who’ve rallied to Biden’s side speaking definitively, or have they left themselves enough wiggle room to revisit the question in the days ahead, after this week’s NATO summit?* Is Biden world deluding itself with bad arguments and data analysis, or his advisers just vying for time while they evaluate their options?Then, behind the paywall, we look at recent historical evidence suggesting Dems, and an alternate presidential candidate, would get a bounce simply by heeding public opinion and swapping Biden out for someone younger and in control of their rhetorical faculties. Are public impressions of Kamala Harris that formed five years ago really frozen in place? Would she be able to hold the anti-Trump coalition together better than Biden simply by dint of being able to attack, defend, and inspire extemporaneously? Could Democrats organize a hero’s exit for Biden appealing enough to tempt him off the path to world historical disgrace?All that, plus the full Politix archive and Thursday’s live chat are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian on how coffee-table historians might suddenly be the most influential people in America.* Matt: “I was wrong about Joe Biden.”* writes the remarks Biden should deliver.

Transcribed - Published: 10 July 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm Just days after the first presidential debate, which has plunged Democrats into a crisis of confidence, the Supreme Court has intervened to declare that presidents have absolute immunity from criminal prosecutions for any actions they take with their exclusive and plenary powers, and even presumptive immunity for their other official acts.We’d viewed this case mainly with an eye to its impact on the criminal prosecution of Donald Trump for trying to overturn the 2020 election. But that’s only because we (like most people) imagined the Supreme Court might delay the trial without radically altering the balance of power between the branches. They instead went much, much further.With Matt on vacation, Brian welcomes former Solicitor General Don Verrilli as this week’s special guest. Brian and Don discuss:* How the court’s ruling creates two sets of rules: One for law-abiding presidents and one for Donald Trump and his imitators;* Whether and how Joe Biden can use this new ruling for good; * What if anything Congress can do about it short of amending the constitution or packing the Supreme Court.If you aren’t yet a paid subscriber to Politix, you can listen to the whole conversation by upgrading to a paid subscription.

Transcribed - Published: 3 July 2024

Folks, it did not go well. Joe Biden definitively lost the first of two scheduled presidential debates against Donald Trump. Worse, he did so in a way that will inevitably rekindle questions about his candidacy, and not just from bloggers and columnists, but likely from some of the most influential Democrats in America. In this free post-debate episode, Matt and Brian discuss:* Who swapped out Biden’s PEDs for sugar pill?* Is there anything Biden, his campaign, the White House, and leading Democrats can do to steady the ship, given the magnitude of the fuck up?* What would the process of convincing Biden to end his campaign out of patriotic duty look like in practice. * Would he necessarily have to hand the baton to Kamala Harris, or would he be able to anoint an entirely new ticket. If you’re new to Politix, welcome! We hope you’ll continue to listen, and consider upgrading to a paid subscription. This is a public episode. If you’d like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit www.politix.fm/subscribe

Transcribed - Published: 28 June 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm Special announcement from Matt and Brian: We will be hosting a live chat during Thursday night’s debate for paid Politix subscribers. If you’d like to ride shotgun with us, or need moral support to get through the event, be on the lookout for an email invitation to joint the chat just as the debate begins at 9 p.m. ET Thursday.In that spirit, for this week’s regular episode, Matt and Brian rattled off a few debate predictions—listen for those and see how well they hold up. But mostly this is an episode about the incoherence and opportunism of the Trump/MAGA foreign policy vision.* Is there any way to make sense of Trump’s biggest global affairs interventions? * To what extent has Biden been reaping the consequences of Trump’s bluster and blunders?* What do people like J.D. Vance, Marco Rubio, Robert O’Brien, et al—people who want to ride Trump’s coattails—think they’re getting out of Trump’s foreign policy of self-aggrandizement and predation?Then, behind the paywall, a longer discussion about how the nature of Trump’s foreign-policy corruption makes the world more ungovernable, even when he’s out of power. To what extent have foreign autocrats made decisions about war and trade and diplomacy with an eye toward helping Trump return to power? Is it even possible for the world to run through official channels when the leader of a major U.S. political party has a shadow cabinet trotting the globe soliciting favors and bribes? And are there signs that Trump’s autocratic partners around the world have grown wary of the risk of using Trump to advance their interests and degrade democracy?All that, plus the full Politix archive and Thursday’s live chat are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Ross Douthat’s interview with J.D. Vance.* Brian on why right-wing leaders around might be more tempted to engage in foreign mischief when the U.S. president is a liberal Democrat rather than a Republican kleptocrat. * Matt on the foreign policy bombs Trump set. * Trump-loyalist Robert O’Brien admits his and Trump’s China policy failed.

Transcribed - Published: 26 June 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian take a wide-angle view of new data showing inflation and violent crime way down: * Why is good economic news so tricky for Joe Biden to capitalize on? * How can Biden remind voters that Trump handed him a depressed economy with broken supply chains, and that Biden fixed both unemployment and inflation?* Is it fair to tag Trump with the 2020 economic collapse and crime surge?Then, behind the paywall, we home in specifically on the crime issue, where the case that Biden saved the country from Trump’s failures is strongest: Why did murders explode in 2020? To what extent is Trump to blame for fomenting criminal activity or for discouraging fair, legitimate policing? How did Biden manage to get a handle on both sides of that equation so quickly? All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Research suggests accountable police do better policing, while police facing public blowback do worse policing.* The best data we have shows violent crime collapsing under Biden. * This strong new Biden campaign ad could provide a template for running against Trump’s other liabilities.* Matt reminds the forgetful that Trump’s presidency was really bad. * Brian argues Biden should simply assert he beat Trumpflation and the Trump crime wave.

Transcribed - Published: 19 June 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian discuss the flood of support Donald Trump has seen from shady rich guys since his felony convictions two weeks ago: * Why do the owners and executives of big firms feel insulated from consequences for supporting a convicted white-collar felon who tried to overthrow the government? * Do they actually stand to gain anything from a corrupt, inflationary Trump presidency?* Can Joe Biden use their support for Trump as a wedge to win back more blue-collar voters?Then, behind the paywall, we try to assess what’s driving this trend: To what extent are tech and finance bros actually red-pilled, versus just cynically advancing their shared desire for tax cuts? Have they even considered the ways Trump 2.0 would weaken U.S. business, or that they might not actually be able to call in any favors with him? And what, if anything, should Biden do to clarify the stakes for both the billionaires, and the working-class Americans who stand to lose if Trump returns to power. All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Politico on how billionaires learned to stop worrying and love Trump.* Reid Hoffman on how empowering a criminal would be bad for business. * ’s book We Got People on the fight between pro-worker populism, which enjoys large organic support, and moneyed interests, which do not—a dichotomy that may be crumbling.* Brian on why these business elites are so dumb!

Transcribed - Published: 12 June 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, Matt and Brian discuss the solidifying Democratic response to Donald Trump’s felony convictions, and scratch their heads a bit: * Why are Democrats demurring when the facts are the ground are so advantageous to them?* How consistent is this with the party’s past practice of shrugging off Trump-accountability moments?* What if any role should data play in these kinds of rapid response moments, when Trump’s widespread unpopularity is so consistent?Then, behind the paywall, we break down the forces within the party that cut against a unified, vigorous response: Does taking it easy on Trump really help swing-state and swing-district Democrats? How do Democratic congressional leaders actually conceive of their jobs? Would progressive leaders rather talk about Trump’s status as a felony convict and rapist, or about their policy agendas? Plus, what do Matt and Brian think a savvy response to the convictions look like? All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian on various tactics and strategies Democrats could deploy to keep reminders of Trump’s convictions above the fold.* Josh Marshall with an important reminder to Dems and the media not to let the GOP’s affected aggression in the wake of the verdict mind trick them into allowing Republicans to set the terms of the discourse. * A New York Times focus group suggests getting convicted of 34 felonies is not, in fact, good news for a presidential candidate.

Transcribed - Published: 5 June 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm SPECIAL EDITION: A New York jury declared Trump guilty on all 34 felony counts he faced, finding that he forged business records to cover up his illegal conduct in the 2016 election.Matt and Brian:* Review the case and the law and the controversy around it;* Discuss the relevance of the news—particularly to new voters who may have been too young to hear the Access Hollywood tape, or know that Trump paid hush money to a porn star;* Air out the many ways Democrats might and should talk about Trump’s new status as a felon, and the conduct he committed to earn that distinction.Then, behind the paywall, we review official reaction to the verdict in “real time,” discuss how this might snowball into greater interest in the trial Trump has successfully managed to delay, and examine the nexus of the hush-money case to his abortion bans, and his work to eliminate reproductive rights nationwide. All that, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Brian on why Alvin Bragg’s prosecution was righteous from the outset.* Former Manhattan prosecutor Rebecca Roiphe explained to Politix listeners why Bragg’s liberal critics were wrong.* Brian on why President Biden should lift his vow of silence and begin making political hay of Trump’s criminal exposure.

Transcribed - Published: 31 May 2024

This is a free preview of a paid episode. To hear more, visit www.politix.fm This week, with so many American liberals and leaders abroad worrying about what a second Trump term will mean for them, Matt and Brian examine the many political differences between fear and fearlessness. For instance:* If Trump’s threats have become more literal and less figurative, how can liberals most effectively oppose him without sounding like panicky wimps?* Have Trump-curious business elites taken leave of their senses, or do they really think Trump can’t possibly harm American capitalism more than huge corporate tax cuts will “help”?* Do progressives agree that Trump is an existential threat to democracy? And if so, are they receptive to muscular “bring it on” politics, or are crisis and doom the only appeals that speak to them. Then, behind the paywall, Brian and Matt take a look at global and domestic developments—from the Mexican election to diplomacy in the Middle East and the zombie border bill in Congress—to assess how actors with everything on the line are changing their behavior and contingency planning for a second Trump term. If they’re freaking out, why shouldn’t we be? If the situation is so dire, shouldn’t Biden entertain more drastic measures? Can U.S. leaders be simultaneously clear eyed in planning for the worst and resolute (rather than cowering) in their resistance?Answers to all those questions, plus the full Politix archive are available to paid subscribers—just upgrade your subscription and pipe full episodes directly to your favorite podcast app via your own private feed. Further reading:* Matt, on how Trump’s scams will only get worse in a second term. * Brian on why progressive activists should lay off murder-suicide threats as “leverage.”* Greg Sargent on the Trump movement’s many sadistic fantasies.* Jamelle Bouie on the people (immigrants) who will bear the brunt of this sadism.

Transcribed - Published: 29 May 2024