Avsnitt
-
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 -
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.
-
Saknas det avsnitt?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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).
*
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
-
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 -
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.
-
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.
-
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 -
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 …
-
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?
-
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.
-
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.
-
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.
- Visa fler
